Sewell v. Anheuser-Busch InBev

Calvin G. Sewell, Plaintiff v. Anheuser-Busch InBev, et al.,¹ Defendants DECISION & ORDER On June 25, 2021, the pro se plaintiff, Calvin G. Sewell, commenced this action alleging that beer produced by the defendants caused his colon cancer. See Docket Item 1; Docket Item 14 (amended complaint). On May 18, 2023, defendant Anheuser-Busch InBev NA/SV (“A-B InBev”) moved to dismiss the claims against it for insufficient service of process and lack of personal jurisdiction. Docket Item 29. Counsel for A-B InBev also moved to dismiss the claims against defendant “Anheuser Busch Worldwide, Inc.” (“A-B Worldwide”) for the same reasons, stating that there is no such company. Docket Item 29-1 at 5-6. The third defendant, Anheuser-Busch, LLC (“A-B LLC”), answered Sewell’s complaint. Docket Item 30. After Sewell failed to respond to the motion to dismiss, this Court ordered him to show cause by September 25, 2023, why it should not decide A-B InBev’s motion based on the papers currently before it. Docket Item 38. Sewell responded by asking this Court to appoint him counsel, stating that “[he is] illiterate” and that “[his] failure to respond [was] due to [his] lack of knowledge” of “complex civil law.” Docket Item 41. This Court denied Sewell’s motion without prejudice. Docket Item 43. It explained that at the current stage of the case — before deciding a motion to dismiss that raised threshold procedural and jurisdictional questions — the Court could not find that Sewell’s position was “likely to be of substance” and that the appointment of counsel therefore might be warranted. Id. (quoting Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61 (2d Cir. 1986)). But in light of Sewell’s request for counsel, the Court afforded him one final opportunity to respond to A-B InBev’s motion to dismiss. Id. Despite that extension, Sewell did not respond to the motion to dismiss — nor has he filed anything else in this case — and the time to do so now has expired. See id. The Court therefore addresses A-B InBev’s motion to dismiss, and for the reasons that follow, grants that motion because it lacks personal jurisdiction over A-B InBev and A-B Worldwide.² BACKGROUND³ Sewell, who is in his sixties, has a history of alcohol use. See Docket Item 14 at 11-18 (Sewell’s medical records attached to amended complaint). In March 2019, while he was drinking a “can of [Natural Ice] beer,”⁴ id. at 4, he “discovered” that there was “a coin” — specifically, a “dime” — inside the can, and he “was [told] to go to the emergency room[],[ ]which [he] did.” Id. at 4-5. He has since been diagnosed with terminal stage 4 colon cancer and has been receiving treatment ever since. Id. at 5. Sewell alleges that his cancer was caused by the “Natural Ice beer products” that are “manufactur[ed],” “dispens[ed],” and “sold” by the three defendants: A-B InBev, A-B Worldwide, and A-B LLC.⁵ See id. at 2, 7; see also id. at 7 (stating that “the acts of negligence committed by [the] defendants…caused [Sewell] to contract stage 4 cancer”). With respect to A-B InBev in particular, Sewell says both that it “manufacture[s] and own[s]” the brand of beer that caused his cancer, id. at 4, and that it is the “ owner[] of [the] beer[-]selling company,” id. at 3. He notes that alcohol and nickel — one of the metals that a dime is made of — are carcinogenic. Id. at 4-6. And he says that the defendants’ “beer products do not contain any appropriate warnings” about that potential cancer risk. See id. at 2, 5, 9. Sewell seeks 20 million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages. Id. at 5. According to an affidavit submitted by A-B InBev Vice President of Corporate Thomas Larson, who has “personal knowledge of the corporate structures and operations of both A-B InBev and A-B [LLC], as well as their related corporate entities,” A-B InBev is “a foreign corporation organized under the laws of Belgium and headquartered in Leuven, Belgium.” Docket Item 29-3 at

1-3. It also is “the indirect corporate parent of” A-B LLC. Id. at 3. A-B InBev “does not manufacture or sell beer,” and it “is not licensed [to do so] in the State of New York.” Id. at 6. Instead, it “owns subsidiaries that own subsidiaries that manufacture and sell beer.” Id. One such subsidiary, A-B LLC, is “headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri”; “manufacture[s]…Natural Light beer”; and “owns the [Natural Light] brand.” Id. at