PJX

PJX refers to the courts power over the person of D. There are two types of PJX: general
and specific. General exists when D has extensive continuous and systematic contacts
with the forum state such that a court in that state can hear any dispute involving D.
iti!enship is irrelevant to determinations of PJX" it only matters to the extent that a
citi!en of a state will most li#ely have continuous and systematic contacts with that state.
$nstead% the court loo#s at the nature and &uality of Ds contacts. 'ervice of process on D
while D is present in the forum state confers general (urisdiction% even if Ds activities in
the state are unrelated to the suit. This is #nown as transient (urisdiction. )urthermore%
specific (urisdiction exists when D has sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state%
the suit arose out of those contacts% and haling D into court would not offend the
traditional notions of fair play and su*stantial (ustice. 'pecific (urisdiction re&uires some
act on the part of D *y which D purposefully availed himself or herself of the privileges
of conducting activity in the forum state% there*y invo#ing its protections and *enefits.
+lso% Ds conduct and contacts within the forum state must *e such that he could
reasona*ly foresee *eing haled into court in that state.
T,+-').,
)or the convenience of parties and witnesses% in the interest of (ustice% a district court
may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have *een
*rought
)/,01 -/- /-2.-$.-'
+ court may dismiss a case if it finds there is a prefera*le alternate forum
'1JX
'1JX concerns the types of cases that can *e *rought *efore a court. 0nli#e state courts%
which are typically courts of general (urisdiction% federal courts are courts of limited
(urisdiction. 1ost cases *rought *efore a federal court are federal &uestion and diversity
cases. )ederal &uestion (urisdiction refers to the authority of a federal court to hear any
civil action arising out the onstitution% laws% or treaties of the 0nited 'tates. $n
determining whether it has federal &uestion (urisdiction% a federal court relies on the well3
pleaded complaint rule% which re&uires that a federal &uestion appear in Ps complaint"
anticipation of possi*le defenses *ased on federal law is insufficient. )urthermore%
diversity (urisdiction exists when there is complete diversity *etween and among all Ps
and Ds at the time the action is commenced% and the amount in controversy exceeds 45#%
exclusive of interest and costs. +n individuals citi!enship is determined *y his or her
state of domicile% that is% his or her physical presence in a state% coupled with the intent to
remain there indefinitely. )or diversity purposes% a corporation is deemed a citi!en in the
state where it is incorporate and the state where its principle place of *usiness is located.
2.-0.
2enue is concerned with the specific court within a (urisdiction where the parties can
litigate. 2enue is proper in a (udicial district where any D resides if all Ds reside in the
same state. 2enue is also proper in a (udicial district where a su*stantial part of the events
or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or a su*stantial part of the property that is
the su*(ect of the action is located. $f venue cannot *e determined on either of these
*ases% the action can *e *rought in a (udicial district where any D is su*(ect to PJX 6if
(urisdiction is *ased solely on diversity7 or where any D may found 6if (urisdiction is not
*ased solely on diversity7.
.,$. D/T,$-.
0nder .rie% a federal district court sitting in diversity is *ound *y the su*stantive law of
the state in which it sits. The .rie doctrine serves to minimi!e forum shopping and the
ine&uita*le administration of the laws. $f there is a ),P% ),+P% or federal statute on
point% the federal law applies unless it violates the ,.+ or onstitution. $f there is no
such federal rule% *ut there is an uncodified federal rule% the court determines whether the
conflicting state law is *ound up with state created interests. $f the state law is *ound up
with state created interests% the state law applies. $f the state law is not *ound up with
state created interests% the court determines whether applying the state law would *e
outcome3determinative% that is% dictate the outcome of the case. $f applying the state law
would not *e outcome3determinative% the federal rule applies. $f applying the state law
would *e outcome3determinative% the court applies the 8yrd *alancing test. $t weighs the
state interest in the state law against countervailing federal considerations% and depending
on whether the state court or federal court has a greater interest% applies the state law or
federal rule.
-/T$.
-otice must *e reasona*ly calculated to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the
action and to afford them the opportunity to present their o*(ections.
'.,2$. /) P,/.''
Process must *e served on a D *y a means reasona*ly calculated to inform D of the
pendency of the action and to afford D the opportunity to present his or her o*(ections.
'0PP JX
$n any civil action over which the district court has original (urisdiction% the court% at its
discretion% may hear claims over which it lac#s original (urisdiction if those claims form
part of the same case or controversy under art 9 of const or arise from a common nucleus
of operative fact as a claim that invo#ed fed sm(x
,.1/2+:
+ny civil action over which the district court has original (urisdiction% whether federal
&uestion or diversity (urisdiction% is removal *y D to another district court for the district
em*racing the place where such action is pending. $n a diversity case% however% the
action is not removal if any of the Ds is a citi!en of the state in which the action is
*rought.
/1P:+$-T
+ complaint must contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for the courts
(urisdiction% a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled
to relief% and a demand for the relief sought.
+-';.,
D must respond to a complaint *y admitting or denying each of the allegations asserted
against it *y P% and stating in short and plain terms its defenses to each of the claims
asserted against it.
P,.3+-;., 1/T$/-'
+ party assert the following defenses *y motion: lac# of sm(x% lac# of p(x% improper
venue% insufficient process% insufficient service of process% failure to state a claim upon
which relief can *e granted% failure to (oin a party under rule <=
'+-T$/-'
+ motion for sanctions is served on the party allegedly violating ,ule <<% *ut not filed
immediately with the court. $f the party allegedly violating ,ule << withdraws or corrects
the challenged document within >< days% no sanctions imposed on that party.