Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 16,300+ case briefs...

Power Paragon, Inc. v. Precision Technology USA, Inc.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
605 F. Supp. 2d 722 (2008)


Power Paragon, Inc. (Power) (plaintiff) was an engineering firm incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Anaheim, California. Precision Technology USA, Inc. (Precision) (defendant) was a manufacturer and supplier incorporated in Virginia with its principal place of business in Roanoke, Virginia. L-3, a parent company of Power, entered an agreement with Precision under which Power would deliver a motor controller to Precision and install it on a ship. Initial negotiations began with an inquiry from Precision around October 5, 2005. L-3 made a formal proposal on December 20, 2005. The terms of the proposal stated that the offer would be valid for 45 days. The proposal also required that all disputes arising out of the contract be settled by arbitration, and conditioned acceptance of the proposal upon assent to its terms. Additional discussions regarding the contract continued. Precision submitted a purchase order on March 10, 2006. The purchase order stated that Virginia law governed and that all disputes would be heard in the appropriate state or federal court in Roanoke, Virginia. The federal district court in Roanoke is the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. On September 11, 2006, the controller was shipped to Michigan and then to New York for functional testing. On May 30, 2008, the controller was shipped to Newport News, Virginia for installation on the ship. Precision failed to make payments as required. Power brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (i.e., the district including Newport News) alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Precision brought a motion to dismiss for improper venue.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Jackson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 372,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,300 briefs, keyed to 223 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial