Ihf Ltd. v. Myra Bag, 391 F. Supp. 3d 760

Background

Plaintiffs IHF Ltd. and MONA B, LLC (Ohio) allege Indian manufacturers Khemchand Handicrafts/Myra Bag and its owner Katri copied Mona B handbag designs after a supplier relationship ended, and filed suit for copyright, trademark/trade dress, false designation, state consumer-fraud claims, and tortious interference.
Plaintiffs amended to add U.S.-based sales representative defendants (Terry Moore; Shannon Consultants; Penny Harrison; NEST; Cathy & Co.; Markwest; The Rep Connection; Cheryl Lynn Associates (CLA); Peggy Lichty) alleging they assisted distribution or sales into Ohio.
Several U.S. defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; the Court allowed three months (extended to five) of jurisdictional discovery focused on personal jurisdiction.
After briefing and discovery, the Court dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction: Markwest; Terry Moore; Shannon Consultants; NEST; Cathy; CLA; Peggy Lichty. The Rep Connection and Penny Harrison were dismissed without prejudice for failure to effect service under Rule 4(m).
The Court treated plaintiffs’ post-discovery showing as a prima facie standard (construing conflicting facts favorably to plaintiffs) but found plaintiffs failed to produce specific facts linking defendants’ Ohio contacts to the asserted claims (e.g., no evidence defendants sold infringing Myra Bag products in Ohio).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Personal jurisdiction under Ohio long-arm over sales reps (Markwest, Cathy, NEST, CLA, others)	Defendants transacted business/contracted to supply goods in Ohio or caused tortious injury in Ohio via sales into Ohio (purchase orders, vendors, showroom contacts, fulfillment center linkage)	Defendants lacked meaningful in-state transactions tied to the claims; sales/resellers/independent contractors and out-of-state showroom visits do not create Ohio contacts; minimal revenue tied to Ohio	Court: Dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction; plaintiffs failed to show nexus between defendants’ Ohio contacts and the claims, and revenue/contacts were insufficient under Ohio long-arm and Due Process principles
Specific vs. general jurisdiction over CLA	Plaintiffs point to large total sales and some sales of Myra Bag products into Ohio	CLA is incorporated and based in Michigan; Ohio sales via independent contractors over which CLA has little control; sales not attributable to CLA	Court: No general jurisdiction; no specific jurisdiction because claims do not arise from CLA’s own Ohio contacts; dismissed
Standard after jurisdictional discovery / admissibility of affidavits	Plaintiffs sought to exclude defendants’ affidavits and argued discovery should raise plaintiffs’ burden	Defendants submitted affidavits; court may resolve on affidavits, limited discovery, or evidentiary hearing	Court used prima facie standard (construing conflicts for plaintiffs) but permitted consideration of affidavits; dismissal where plaintiffs produced no contrary evidence
Service of process for The Rep Connection and Penny Harrison	Plaintiffs attempted service but did not complete it within time; sought default then withdrew	Defendants were not served; Rule 4(m) requires service within 90 days	Court: Dismissed these two defendants without prejudice for failure to serve; plaintiffs may re-serve (Indian defendants given deadline separately)

Key Cases Cited

Theunissen v. Matthews, 935 F.2d 1454 (6th Cir.) (district court may decide jurisdictional motion on affidavits, discovery, or hearing)
Air Prod. & Controls, Inc. v. Safetech Int'l, Inc., 503 F.3d 544 (6th Cir.) (prima facie showing standard on written submissions)
Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (U.S.) (general jurisdiction: corporation "at home" in state of incorporation or principal place of business)
Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915 (U.S.) (paradigm forums for general jurisdiction)
BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (U.S.) (extensive in-state operations alone insufficient for general jurisdiction)
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Ct. of Cal., S.F. Cty., 137 S. Ct. 1773 (U.S.) (specific jurisdiction requires claims to arise out of or relate to defendant's forum contacts)
Intera Corp. v. Henderson, 428 F.3d 605 (6th Cir.) (three-part test for specific jurisdiction)
Southern Machine Co. v. Mohasco Indus., Inc., 401 F.2d 374 (6th Cir.) (formulation of purposeful availment/arising-from/reasonableness test)
Serras v. First Tenn. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 875 F.2d 1212 (6th Cir.) (effect of decision method on plaintiff's burden for jurisdictional showing)
Conn v. Zakharov, 667 F.3d 705 (6th Cir.) (Ohio long-arm statute not coterminous with Due Process)