LG Electronics, Inc., et al. v. Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corporation, et al., C.A. No. 12-1063- LPS, November 5, 2014.

Burke, M. J. Report and Recommendation recommending that defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or transfer be granted in part and denied in part.

The accused products are internal and external ODDs. The court finds that the Korean defendant’s accused products are sold with the intent to serve the United States, and thus Delaware’s, markets. Under a dual jurisdiction theory, the court finds personal jurisdiction in Delaware since many thousands of accused products were sold in Delaware in the last few years.  The court also finds that the requirements of due process are satisfied, and recommends the motion to dismiss be denied with respect to this defendant.  The same is not true with respect to the Japanese defendant.  Here, the question is whether the parent can be held accountable for the acts of a subsidiary. There is no evidence of record regarding agency or corporate control, and the court recommends granting the motion to dismiss with respect to this defendant.  The court declines to recommend transferring the action relating to Japanese defendant since plaintiffs have not identified a possible transferee court.