National Feeds, Inc. v. United Pet Foods, Inc., 118 F. Supp. 3d 972

NFI sues UPF for producing and selling rancid mink and dog feed that NFI distributed to customers.
In 2009, Buschur approached UPF to mill feed; a contract was drafted, UPF signed in Indiana and returned to Ohio.
February 2010 UPF produced first batches; feed shipped from UPF’s Indiana plant to Wisconsin centers or NFI customers; UPF did not handle shipping or sell to customers.
June 2010 customers reported problems; testing showed high peroxide levels indicating rancidity, causing herd losses and insurer payments.
Plaintiffs allege multiple claims including breach of contract, negligence, product liability; case filed April 2012.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Waiver of personal jurisdiction defense	UPF litigated merits for years, signaling defense on merits.	Waiver did not apply; defense could be raised late due to discovery or oversight.	Waived personal jurisdiction due to active participation and delay in raising objection.
Waiver of improper venue	UPF’s extensive litigation conduct implied venue defense consent.	Venue defense not waived; later assertion allowed only if not prejudicial.	Waived venue defense for the same reasons as jurisdiction.

Days Inns Worldwide, Inc. v. Patel, 445 F.3d 899 (6th Cir.2006) (active participation can waive Rule 12 defenses)
Rauch v. Day & Night Mfg. Corp., 576 F.2d 697 (6th Cir.1978) (venue defenses can be waived)
Plunkett v. Valhalla Inv. Servs. Inc., 409 F.Supp.2d 39 (D.Mass.2006) (purpose of Rule 12(h) to avoid unnecessary delays)
Yeldell v. Tutt, 913 F.2d 533 (8th Cir.1990) (timely raising Rule 12 defenses is required)
Rates Tech., Inc. v. Nortel Networks Corp., 399 F.3d 1302 (Fed.Cir.2005) (waiver principles from previous circuit decisions)