Aura Sub Moves for Dismissal of Spam Email Case for Lack of Jurisdiction

Aura Sub seeks the dismissal of a complaint in which plaintiff Nathan Brinton alleges the owner of digital security and antivirus software seller UltraVPN initiated or assisted in the transmission of more than 100 spam email solicitations to his various email addresses (see 2311280036), said its motion Monday (docket 3:23-cv-06084) in U.S. District Court for Western Washington in Tacoma. Brinton concedes Aura wasn’t the one that sent “the allegedly violative emails,” it said. That concession “is fatal to any attempt” to argue that the court has personal jurisdiction over Aura, it said. Aura isn’t subject to general jurisdiction in Washington because it’s incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Massachusetts, it said. This isn’t “an exceptional case” where the court could otherwise conclude that Aura is “at home” in Washington, it said. Aura also isn’t subject to specific jurisdiction “because it has none of the requisite minimum contacts with Washington that would allow the court to conclude that it purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in Washington,” it said. The contacts of the third parties who sent the emails to Brinton while he “fortuitously resided” in Washington can’t be “imputed” to Aura, it said. The 9th and 10th circuit U.S. courts of appeal and numerous district courts “have concluded as much in nearly identical situations as those presented here,” it said.