Koswire, Inc. v. Alpha Stainless, Ltd., 2:18-cv-00047

Koswire, a Georgia corporation, ordered 120,000 lbs of hot rolled annealed & pickled (HRAP) wire rod from Alpha Stainless (U.K.); shipments arrived in Georgia in Dec 2015, Jan 2016, Mar 2016.
Koswire later discovered (Sept. 2016) the wire was not annealed; Sandvik (supplier to Alpha Stainless) confirmed non-annealed status.
Alpha Stainless performed negotiations and shipped product to Koswire; Robert A. Bond (Connecticut resident) introduced Koswire contact to Alpha Stainless and received commissions; Alpha Wire & Rod Sales, LLC is Bond's Connecticut company.
Koswire sued Alpha Stainless, Alpha Wire, and Bond in Georgia state court; defendants removed to federal court and moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, forum non conveniens (relying on an English forum-selection clause), and pleading defects.
The court held it has specific personal jurisdiction over Alpha Stainless based on the parties’ negotiations, repeated transactions, and shipments into Georgia, but it lacks personal jurisdiction over Alpha Wire and Bond.
Separately, the court found Alpha Stainless’s invoice reference to Terms & Conditions (which included an English forum-selection clause) was reasonably communicated and enforceable, so the case against Alpha Stainless was dismissed on forum non conveniens in favor of courts of England and Wales.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Personal jurisdiction over Alpha Stainless	Koswire: repeated negotiations, three shipments, and harm in GA establish purposeful availment	Alpha Stainless: minimal contacts, transactions overseas, inconvenience of GA forum	Court: specific jurisdiction exists — minimum contacts and fair play satisfied
Personal jurisdiction over Alpha Wire & Bond	Koswire: Bond solicited business and represented supply of annealed wire	Defs: Bond merely introduced parties from CT, performed no negotiations or sales in GA	Court: no specific jurisdiction — contacts insufficient; dismissal as to Alpha Wire and Bond granted
Enforceability of forum-selection clause (Alpha Stainless T&Cs)	Koswire: clause not reasonably communicated because T&Cs were not actually provided	Alpha Stainless: invoices explicitly referenced T&Cs and were sent before first shipment; T&Cs available on request	Court: clause reasonably communicated and presumptively enforceable
Forum non conveniens dismissal for Alpha Stainless	Koswire: GA is proper forum and public-interest favors adjudication here	Alpha Stainless: English courts are exclusive per clause; evidence and witnesses in U.K.	Court: because valid forum-selection clause exists, private factors favor U.K.; public factors not sufficiently extraordinary to keep case in GA — dismissal granted

Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (purposeful availment and contract contacts test)
Atlantic Marine Const. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for W. Dist. of Texas, 571 U.S. 49 (effect of valid forum-selection clause on forum non conveniens analysis)
Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277 (contacts must be created by defendant with the forum)
Diamond Crystal Brands, Inc. v. Food Movers Intl, Inc., 593 F.3d 1249 (plus factors and fair-play balancing in specific jurisdiction)
Krenkel v. Kerzner Int'l Hotels Ltd., 579 F.3d 1279 (reasonable communication test for non-negotiated forum-selection clauses)
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408 (relatedness requirement for specific jurisdiction)
Posner v. Essex Ins. Co., 178 F.3d 1209 (procedural instruction on addressing 12(b)(2) before 12(b)(6))