Washington Shoe Company v. A-Z Sporting Goods Inc
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BYBEE, Circuit Judge:
In this copyright infringement action, we address whether an Arkansas retailer is subject to personal jurisdiction in Washington when its only relevant contact with the state is a claim that it willfully violated a copyright held by a Washington corporation. The district court for the Western District of Washington dismissed Washington Shoe Company’s (‘Washington Shoe”) action against A-Z Sporting Goods, Inc. (“A-Z”) for lack of personal jurisdiction. We reverse.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff-appellant Washington Shoe is a Washington corporation that has…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by158 opinions
- Learjet, Inc. v. Oneok, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Bernard Picot v. Dean WestonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Axiom Foods, Inc. v. Acerchem International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- K. Morrill v. Scott Financial Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Freestream Aircraft (Bermuda) v. Aero Law GroupCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
153 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.