‘Specific Personal Jurisdiction Exists’ Over ZTE, Says Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
The Walker family’s product liability claims “should be permitted to continue,” and ZTE’s Oct. 17 motion to dismiss denied “since specific personal jurisdiction exists over ZTE,” said the Walkers’ memorandum in opposition Monday (docket 2:21-cv-00923) in U.S. District Court for…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Western Louisiana in Lake Charles. The surviving wife and two sons of pastor Frank Walker allege the defective phones Frank Walker used, plus the industry’s coverup of those phones, led to his death from brain cancer in 2020 because they exceeded the FCC’s specific absorption rate limitations for how much RF radiation is absorbed into the human body. ZTE agreed Nov. 1 to stay the briefing on its motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction until the court resolved the motion from AT&T, Cricket, CTIA, Microsoft, Motorola and the Telecommunications Industry Association to dismiss the case because the Walkers’ claims are preempted by federal law (see 2211020028). The court on April 18 dismissed, on federal preemption grounds, all claims that the industry covered up information showing many cellphones don’t comply with the SAR standard (see 2304230001). ZTE “has purposefully directed its activities toward Louisiana,” enabling the company “to avail itself of the privileges and protections of conducting business” in the state, said the Walkers’ opposition memorandum. The Walkers’ claims arise out of, and as a result of, ZTE’s contacts with Louisiana, it said. “It would be fair and reasonable” for ZTE “to be held accountable in Louisiana,” it said. “Specific personal jurisdiction exists” over ZTE, and the Walkers’ claims “should be permitted to proceed,” it said. ZTE's reply brief is due May 22.