FRICK v. BIG LOTS STORES, INC., 2:15cv360. (2017)
Court: District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20170111f85
Visitors: 4
Filed: Jan. 10, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 10, 2017
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER DAVID STEWART CERCONE , District Judge . AND NOW, this 10th day of January, 2017, upon due consideration of defendant/third-party plaintiff Big Lots' motion for leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery as to third-party defendant Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. ("BVCPS — India"), and defendant BVCPS — India's opposition thereto, IT IS ORDERED that [119] the motion be, and the same hereby is, granted. Defendant Big Lots is granted leave to pursu
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER DAVID STEWART CERCONE , District Judge . AND NOW, this 10th day of January, 2017, upon due consideration of defendant/third-party plaintiff Big Lots' motion for leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery as to third-party defendant Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. ("BVCPS — India"), and defendant BVCPS — India's opposition thereto, IT IS ORDERED that [119] the motion be, and the same hereby is, granted. Defendant Big Lots is granted leave to pursue..
More
MEMORANDUM ORDER
DAVID STEWART CERCONE, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 10th day of January, 2017, upon due consideration of defendant/third-party plaintiff Big Lots' motion for leave to conduct jurisdictional discovery as to third-party defendant Bureau Veritas Consumer Products Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. ("BVCPS — India"), and defendant BVCPS — India's opposition thereto, IT IS ORDERED that [119] the motion be, and the same hereby is, granted. Defendant Big Lots is granted leave to pursue jurisdictional discovery from defendant BVCPS — India over the next 90 days. Defendant Big Lots shall commence its jurisdictional discovery without undue delay.
Defendant Big Lots has presented factual allegations that suggest with sufficient particularity that the possible existence of the requisite minimum contacts with Pennsylvania can be established. Consequently, it is appropriate to permit the requested jurisdictional discovery before resolving the dispute about whether personal jurisdiction may be exercised over defendant BVCPS India. See generally Toys "R" Us, Inc. v. Step Two, S.A., 318 F.3d 446, 455-58 (3d Cir. 2003).
Source: Leagle
