TRADECOMET. COM LLC v. Google, Inc.
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15311
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- TradeComet sued Google in SDNY alleging Sherman Act violations arising from AdWords participation.
- Google's August 2006 terms included a forum selection clause for Santa Clara County, California.
- District court dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1)/(3), enforcing the clause and citing Bremen framework.
- TradeComet argued § 1404(a) transfer was the proper enforcement avenue for an alternate federal forum.
- Court of Appeals reviewed whether Rule 12(b) dismissal can enforce a forum clause permitting an alternate federal forum.
- Court reaffirmed that enforcement via Rule 12(b) is permissible even when clause contemplates an alternative federal forum.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 12(b) dismissal can enforce a forum clause permitting an alternative federal forum | TradeComet argues 12(b) is improper when clause allows alternative federal venue | Google contends 12(b) dismissal appropriate to enforce Bremen-based clause | Yes; 12(b) dismissal can enforce such clauses |
| Stewart Organization vs Bremen framework applicability | Stewart requires § 1404(a) transfer for clause permits alternative federal forum | Stewart does not require § 1404(a) when clause permits an alternative federal forum | Stewart does not compel § 1404(a) enforcement; 12(b) dismissal valid |
| Relation of § 1404(a) and Bremen/Shute lineage in antitrust context | Bremer/Shute rule should be extended to require transfer for federal forum clauses | Bremen/Shute support affirming 12(b) dismissal enforcement in antitrust context | Court aligns with Bremen/Shute; 12(b) dismissal upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- M/S Bremen v. Zapata Offshore Co., 407 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1972) (forum selection clauses prima facie valid and enforceable)
- Phillips v. Audio Active Ltd., 494 F.3d 378 (2d Cir. 2007) (applies Bremen to enforce forum-selection clauses)
- Jones v. Weibrecht, 901 F.2d 17 (2d Cir. 1990) (Bremen doctrine extended to various contexts)
- Bense v. Interstate Battery Sys. of Am., Inc., 683 F.2d 718 (2d Cir. 1982) (forum-selection clauses enforceable; Bremen applied)
- Evolution Online Sys., Inc. v. Koninklijke PTT Nederland N.V., 145 F.3d 505 (2d Cir. 1998) (forum clauses enforceable; Bremen framework used)
- S.K.I. Beer Corp. v. Baltika Brewery, 612 F.3d 705 (2d Cir. 2010) (application of Bremen across contexts)
- Slater v. Energy Servs. Grp. Int'l Inc., 634 F.3d 1326 (11th Cir. 2011) (§ 1404(a) for transfer vs. Rule 12(b) for dismissal distinction)
- Salovaara v. Jackson Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 246 F.3d 289 (3d Cir. 2001) (adds § 1404 considerations in forum-selection enforcement)
- Shute v. Suzuki Motor Co., 496 U.S. 584 (U.S. 1991) (forum-selection clauses reinforced; Bremen lineage)