Atmos Nation LLC v. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33228 (2016)
- Written by Ann Wooster, JD
Facts
A designer and marketer of portable vaporizers, Atmos Nation LLC (Atmos) (plaintiff) sold its products under the Atmos brand name. Atmos discovered that independent merchants were selling counterfeit vaporizers bearing the Atmos brand through various online platforms owned by Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. (Alibaba) (defendant). Alibaba did not operate its platforms or control the content on its platforms, and it did not manufacture, sell, or deliver the products advertised on its platforms. Alibaba was an e-commerce-marketing-services company incorporated in Delaware with its only office in California. Alibaba had no presence in Florida and did not direct its marketing services to Florida in any way. There were no contracts for goods or services between Alibaba and any companies or individuals in Florida, and Alibaba had no employees in Florida. Atmos brought an action against Alibaba under the Lanham Act for trademark infringement, contributory trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, and contributory trademark counterfeiting. Atmos argued that the court had personal jurisdiction over Alibaba and its platforms under Florida’s long-arm statute based on general and specific personal jurisdiction. Alibaba moved to dismiss the complaint due to the court’s lack of personal jurisdiction.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
