Instabook Corp. v. Instantpublisher. Com

How courts have described this case

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

• denying the plaintiff’s request for jurisdictional discovery when plaintiff “only generally requested such discovery, without explaining how such discovery would bolster 3 its contentions’
• “Plaintiff has only generally requested [jurisdictional] discovery, without explaining how [jurisdictional] discovery would bolster its contentions, and Plaintiff has not persuaded the Court that such discovery is warranted in this case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Mother Doe I v. Al Maktoum
  S.D. Florida· 2007-07-30· cited 10×
• Goforit Entertainment LLC v. Digimedia.com L.P.
  M.D. Florida· 2007-08-10· cited 8×
• Dynetech Corp. v. Leonard Fitness, Inc.
  M.D. Florida· 2007-11-26· cited 7×
• Laseraim Tools, Inc. v. SDA Manufacturing, LLC
  E.D. Arkansas· 2008-12-22· cited 4×
• Imageline, Inc. v. FOTOLIA LLC
  N.D. Georgia· 2009-10-07· cited 2×
• Vision Media TV Group, LLC v. Forte
  S.D. Florida· 2010-07-19· cited 2×
• Celorio v. Google Inc.
  N.D. Florida· 2012-04-30· cited 1×
• Andy's Music, Inc. v. Andy's Music, Inc.
  S.D. Alabama· 2009-04-16

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• International Shoe Co. v. Washington
  Supreme Court· 1945-12-03· cited 18,588×
• Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
  Supreme Court· 1985-05-20· cited 12,253×
• World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson
  Supreme Court· 1980-01-21· cited 8,668×
• Milliken v. Meyer
  Supreme Court· 1941-01-20· cited 3,141×
• Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc.
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 1997-01-16· cited 780×
• Beverly Hills Fan Company v. Royal Sovereign Corp. And Ultec Enterprises Co., Ltd.
  Federal Circuit· 1994-03-08· cited 346×
• 3D Systems, Inc. v. Aarotech Laboratories, Inc., Aaroflex, Inc. And Albert C. Young
  Federal Circuit· 1998-11-12· cited 161×
• Inamed Corporation, Inamed Development Company and Bioenterics Corporation v. Lubomyr I. Kuzmak
  Federal Circuit· 2001-05-15· cited 155×
• Silent Drive, Inc. v. Strong Industries, Inc. And Brooks Strong
  Federal Circuit· 2003-04-16· cited 145×
• Trintec Industries, Inc. v. Pedre Promotional Products, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2005-01-19· cited 115×
• North American Philips Corp. v. American Vending Sales, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1994-09-22· cited 55×
• A-Transport Northwest Co., Inc. v. United States
  Federal Circuit· 1994-10-04· cited 52×
• Stomp, Inc. v. NEATO, LLC
  C.D. California· 1999-08-06· cited 39×
• Shamsuddin v. Vitamin Research Products
  D. Maryland· 2004-11-30· cited 22×
• S. Morantz, Inc. v. Hang & Shine Ultrasonics, Inc.
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1999-12-20· cited 20×
• Tech Heads, Inc. v. Desktop Service Center, Inc.
  D. Oregon· 2000-07-11· cited 13×