VERIZON TRADEMARK SERVICES, LLC v. Producers, Inc.
810 F. Supp. 2d 1321
M.D. Fla.2011Background
- Verizon sues IMG Defendants for alleged cybersquatting under the Lanham Act; amended complaint spans 245 pages with numerous affiliates and shell entities.
- IMG Defendants (Intercosmos Media Group, directNIC, and Domain Contender) are Louisiana-based and contend lack of Florida contacts; they seek dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction.
- Verizon asserts Florida long-arm jurisdiction under § 48.193(1)(a) and argues alter ego/agency notions to reach related Florida defendants.
- IMG Defendants submit affidavits denying Florida presence, asserting independence from Florida operations and maintaining offices only in Louisiana.
- Court applies a two-step Florida long-arm analysis (statutory reach and constitutional due process) and assesses general vs. specific jurisdiction, as well as alter ego theory.
- Ultimately, the court grants the IMG Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and discusses due process concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Florida long-arm statute reaches IMG Defendants. | Verizon argues IMG Defendants conduct Florida activities via Tampa office and directNIC operations. | IMG Defendants deny Florida office/ongoing Florida business; no Florida employees, property, or licenses. | Long-arm statute not satisfied; absence of Florida office/business negates jurisdiction. |
| Whether the IMG Defendants are subject to general jurisdiction in Florida. | Verizon claims continuous and systematic Florida contacts via registrar business. | IMG Defendants lack continuous/systematic Florida contacts; no Florida employees or property. | No general jurisdiction established; contacts are not continuous/systematic. |
| Whether the IMG Defendants are alter egos or mere instrumentalities of Florida entities to support jurisdiction. | Verizon contends alter ego/agency between IMG, The Producers, and Florida residents. | IMG Defendants provide affidavits showing separate corporate formalities and independence. | Alter ego theory not proven; veil-piercing not demonstrated under Dania Jai-Alai standards. |
| Whether due process requires dismissal for lack of minimum contacts and fair play, even if some contacts exist. | Verizon emphasizes interactive website directnic.com and Florida residents’ use of services as purposeful availment. | Website activity does not amount to purposeful availment; minimal Florida nexus with negligible Florida impact. | Due process not satisfied; minimum contacts insufficient; exercise of jurisdiction not fair or reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Sykes, 450 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 1984) (veil/alter ego piercing requires improper use and tying to parent)
- Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, 952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D. Pa. 1997) (interactive website as threshold for minimum contacts (location of site matters))
- Oldfield v. Pueblo De Bahia Lora, S.A., 558 F.3d 1210 (11th Cir. 2009) (reaffirmed sphere of website influence and intent without wholesale Zippo framework)
- Horizon Aggressive Growth, L.P. v. Rothstein-Kass, P.A., 421 F.3d 1162 (11th Cir. 2005) ( Florida presence factors: office, license, Florida clients, Florida revenue)
- Goforit Entm't, LLC v. Digimedia.com L.P., 513 F. Supp. 2d 1325 (M.D. Fla. 2007) (internet activity cannot supplant traditional jurisdictional analysis)
- Seabra v. Int'l Specialty Imps., Inc., 869 So.2d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (continuous activity threshold for general jurisdiction considerations)
- Bellairs v. Mohrmann, 716 So.2d 320 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (piercing corporate veil requires proper factual showing)
- Walt Disney Co. v. Nelson, 677 So.2d 400 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (burden-shifting on Florida long-arm jurisdiction analysis)
- Stubbs v. Wyndham Nassau Resort, 447 F.3d 1357 (11th Cir. 2006) (specific approach to minimum contacts and purposeful availment)