Infuturia Global Ltd. v. Sequus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming district court decision dismissing defendant pursuant to Rule 12(b)(7) because of a binding arbitration clause
• noting § 1332(a)(2) applied where only a plaintiff British Virgin 12 Islands citizen and a defendant California citizen remained as parties
• rejecting a district court’s privity requirement, because such a requirement “finds no support in the language of the statute”
• section 205 does not apply to situation in which a defendant’s assertion or jurisdiction is “absurd or impossible”
• section 205 does not apply to situation in which a defendant’s assertion of jurisdiction is “absurd or impossible”
• Section 205 “invites removal of cases whose relation to an agreement or award under the Convention is based on an affirmative defense by expressly abrogating the ‘well-pleaded complaint’ rule.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).