Telemedicine Solutions LLC v. WoundRight Technologies, LLC
27 F.Supp.3d 883 (2014)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For a court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant in an intentional tort case involving internet contacts, the defendant's conduct must be expressly aimed at the forum state, which requires more than merely causing an injury to a resident of that state.
Facts:
- Telemedicine Solutions LLC, an Illinois company, promotes and sells a wound care management system called 'WoundRounds'.
- WoundRight Technologies, LLC, a Wyoming company with its principal place of business in Wyoming, sells a competing system called 'WoundRight'.
- WoundRight maintains a website and social media presence accessible nationwide, but has no physical presence, employees, sales, or customers in Illinois.
- WoundRight purchased a Google AdWords ad that appeared when users searched for 'woundrounds,' stating, 'Considering WoundRounds? — Don’t waste your time[.] Try the latest wound care app for free!'
- The Google ad ran for only five days and was not specifically targeted at Illinois individuals or businesses.
- WoundRight attended industry conferences to demonstrate and sell its products, but none of these conferences took place in Illinois.
- WoundRight's CEO submitted an affidavit stating that prior to the lawsuit, the company was unaware of Telemedicine's existence or its location in Illinois.
Procedural Posture:
- Telemedicine Solutions LLC filed a twelve-count amended complaint against WoundRight Technologies, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
- WoundRight filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) or, alternatively, for improper venue.
- WoundRight also sought, in the alternative, to transfer venue to Wyoming or to dismiss certain counts for failure to state a claim.
- Telemedicine opposed the motion and requested leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a federal court in Illinois have specific personal jurisdiction over a Wyoming-based defendant whose only alleged contacts with Illinois are a nationally accessible website, a social media presence, and a short-lived, non-targeted Google advertisement that disparaged an Illinois-based competitor?
Opinions:
Majority - Dow, Jr., J.
No. The court lacks specific personal jurisdiction because the defendant's conduct was not expressly aimed at Illinois. The Seventh Circuit's 'injury plus' standard, derived from Calder v. Jones, requires that the defendant's conduct, not merely the plaintiff's injury, create a substantial connection with the forum state. Merely operating a nationally accessible website, using social media, or running a non-targeted internet advertisement that injures a forum resident is insufficient to establish the minimum contacts required by due process. The defendant's conduct must connect it to the forum in a meaningful way; the plaintiff cannot be the only link between the defendant and the forum. Here, WoundRight did not purposely exploit the Illinois market, and its online activities had no specific connection to Illinois beyond the fact that the plaintiff resided there.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the Seventh Circuit's restrictive approach to personal jurisdiction based on internet contacts, particularly in intentional tort cases. It solidifies the 'injury plus' requirement, demanding that a plaintiff show the defendant specifically targeted the forum state itself, not just a resident within it. This precedent makes it significantly more difficult for plaintiffs to sue out-of-state defendants in their home forum based solely on generalized online activities like websites or national ad campaigns. The ruling protects companies operating online from being subject to suit in any jurisdiction where their website is accessible, thereby requiring a more tangible connection between the defendant's actions and the state.
Unlock the full brief for Telemedicine Solutions LLC v. WoundRight Technologies, LLC