Cohen IP Law Group Obtains Dismissal Based on Lack of Personal Jurisdiction for Amazon Retail Client


Cohen IP Law Group Obtains Dismissal Based on Lack of Personal Jurisdiction for Amazon Retail Client

In an Amazon patent infringement dispute, on February 21, 2023, the Central District of California dismissed a suit brought by a California company Laltitude, LLC against Cohen IP’s client, an Australian company JC Ingenium PTY LTD.   Laltitude sought declaratory relief for non-infringement of patent, unfair competition, and intentional interference against JC Ingenium an Amazon retailer.

Defendant, JC Ingenium filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Laltitude’s Amended Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over the Australian company.  Laltitude commenced its complaint following JC Ingenium’s filing an infringement report through Amazon’s portal.  Laltitude argued that personal jurisdiction over the Australian company in California was proper because the Amazon takedown notice “constitutes an enforcement effort within the forum” because “Amazon has a significant presence in” California as evidenced by the fact that “Amazon has the most number of warehouses, distribution sites, sellers, and employees in California than any other state in the United States and maintains multiple offices within the district.”

The Court rejected Laltitude’s arguments stating “the Federal Circuit requires that Plaintiff adequately allege that enforcement activities with respect to the takedown notice took place in California. No such allegations are articulated in the FAC, so it fails to establish personal jurisdiction.”   Citing Avocent, the Court reiterated the requirement that Laltitude must establish that defendant must “have engaged in ‘other activities’ that relate to the enforcement or the defense of the validity of the relevant patents” beyond sending a notice of infringement” which was insufficient.  Avocent Huntsville Corp. v. AtenInt’l Co., 552 F.3d 1324, 1328–29 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

The Court concluded by stating  “[t]o the extent Plaintiff characterizes the takedown ‘of its California-based products as extra-judicial enforcement in California, this is mistaken. Just as in Avocent, where the court held that a defendant’s infringement letter to Amazon related to an Alabama-based plaintiff did not create minimum contacts with Alabama, Defendant’s [notice] to Amazon does not create California contacts in this case.’”  Defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint was granted without leave to amend.

Lead Counsel for Defendant JC Ingenium was Michael N. Cohen of Cohen IP Law Group, PC.  Please contact the firm at for a copy of the Order of the decision in Laltitude LLC v. JC Ingenium Pty Ltd et al, Case No. 2:21-cv-08575-MCS-AFM.