A majority opinion from a federal appeals court devotes quite a bit of real estate to pushing back against a dissenting judge’s critiques in a ruling over a digital nomad’s standing in a trademark dispute with Impossible Foods Inc.

In a ruling Tuesday, the majority of a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that a fitness brand called Impossible X is subject to specific personal jurisdiction in California in a declaratory judgment action from Impossible Foods, reversing a trial court order dismissing the case. Impossible X owner Joel Runyon is a self-described digital nomad who says he handles business for the brand “remotely from wherever I happen[] to be,” but set up a de facto headquarters in San Diego from 2014 to 2016.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]