Jurisdiction of U.S. courts over foreign manufacturers

During its 2010-2011 term, the U.S. Supreme Court had the opportunity to furnish comprehensive guidance on the personal jurisdiction of U.S. state courts over foreign manufacturers of products that are sold into this country through global distribution networks. The Court was asked in two cases to clarify the limits that the due process clause of the 14th Amendment places on personal jurisdiction exercised by state courts over such manufacturers. The court consolidated the cases for argument. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations S.A. v. Brown, No. 10-76 (June 27, 2011), and J. McIntyre Machinery Ltd. v. Nicastro, No. 09-1343) (June 27, 2011). The parties and a number of amici urged the Court to undertake the challenging task of clarifying the several differing opinions and disputed interpretations arising from its last personal jurisdiction case implicating international markets and trade, Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of California, 480 U.S. 102 (1987).

In its two opinions, the Court generally adopted a narrow approach to personal jurisdiction that offers some valuable guidance to the courts and business community but also raises new questions and potential problems. U.S. courts, state and federal, will undoubtedly face challenges in applying the holdings in future cases that involve increasingly sophisticated global distribution arrangements for non-U.S. products, Web-based marketing programs and other storeless sales arrangements.