In Curry v. Revolution Laboratories, LLC, No. 17-2900 (7th Cir. Feb. 10, 2020) the Seventh Circuit reversed the district court on a personal jurisdiction issue involving internet presence. There plaintiff brought his action under the Lanham Act, Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, and Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act claims, arising out of defendant’s 2016 marketing of its “Diesel Test Red Series” sports nutritional supplement that plaintiff asserted infringed on its “Diesel Test” dietary nutritional supplement that plaintiff had first manufactured in 2005.
While defendant asserted that personal jurisdiction was lacking because it was not licensed to do business in Illinois, had no place of business, telephone or mailing address in Illinois, and had no employees or real or personal property in Illinois, the Seventh Circuit instead held that defendant had formed sufficient minimum contacts in Illinois so as to allow plaintiff proceed on his cause of action, where record showed that: (1) defendant had sold its Diesel Test product to 767 Illinois residents through its website; (2) defendant’s website required consumers to select Illinois among its “ship to” options; and (3) Illinois residents purchasing defendant’s products received thank-you emails for purchasing defendant’s Diesel Test product. The Court based its jurisdictional analysis on Illinois? long-arm act and traditional due process concepts as the Lanham Act does not provide for nationwide service of process.
The Court of Appeals further noted that defendant’s contacts in Illinois related to plaintiff’s infringement claims, and that it would not be unfair to require defendant to defend instant lawsuit in Illinois, where defendant conducted business at nationwide level through its website.