United States District Court, D. Nevada
before the court is a motion to dismiss filed by defendants
BBC Broadcasting, Inc. (“BBC”), KPRI-AM 1550
kHz-Sher-E-Punjab Radio Broadcasting, Inc.
(“KPRI”), and Bhag Singh Khela
(“Khela”). (ECF No. 17). Plaintiffs Eternal
Charity Foundation (“Eternal”) and Kalgidhar
Trust (“KT”) filed a response (ECF No. 38), to
which defendants replied (ECF No. 54).
before the court is pro se defendant Jagreet Singh
Gill's motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 23). Plaintiffs filed
a response (ECF No. 33), to which Gill replied (ECF No. 55).
before the court is plaintiffs' motion for leave to
amend/correct complaint. (ECF No. 58). BBC filed a response
(ECF No. 60), to which plaintiffs replied (ECF No. 62).
instant action involves allegedly false statements made by
defendants over broadcast radio, on Facebook, and on YouTube.
October 6, 2016, plaintiffs filed the underlying complaint
against defendants BBC, KPRI, Khela, Gill, Kuldip Singh
(“Singh”), and Amarjit Singh Duggal
(“Duggal”), alleging six causes of action: (1)
defamation; (2) slander per se; (3) libel per
se; (4) false light; (5) preliminary and permanent
injunction; (6) intentional interference with prospective
economic advantage. (ECF No. 1).
November 23, 2016, Gill filed an answer. (ECF No. 12). On
December 27, 2016, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed defendants
KPRI and Khela. (ECF No. 31). Defendants Singh and Duggal
have yet to be served.
instant motions, BBC moves to dismiss for lack of personal
jurisdiction and improper venue (ECF No. 17), Gill moves to
dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue
(ECF No. 23), and plaintiffs move for leave to amend their
complaint (ECF No. 58). The court will address each as it
Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) allows a defendant to move
to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. To avoid
dismissal under Rule 12(b)(2), a plaintiff bears the burden
of demonstrating that its allegations would establish a prima
facie case for personal jurisdiction. See Boschetto v.
Hansing, 539 F.3d 1011, 1015 (9th Cir. 2008).
Allegations in plaintiff's complaint must be taken as
true and factual disputes should be construed in the
plaintiff's favor. Rio Props, Inc. v. Rio Int'l
Interlink, 284 F.3d 1007, 1019 (9th Cir. 2002).
federal statute governs personal jurisdiction, the district
court applies the law of the forum state. Boschetto,
539 F.3d at 1015; see also Panavision Int'l L.P. v.
Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316, 1320 (9th Cir. 1998). Where a
state has a “long-arm” statute providing its
courts jurisdiction to the fullest extent permitted by the
due process clause, as Nevada does, a court need only address
federal due process standards. See Arbella Mut. Ins. Co.
v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 P.3d 710, 712 (Nev.
2006) (citing Nev. Rev. Stat. § 14.065); see also
Boschetto, 539 F.3d at 1015.
assertion of personal jurisdiction must comport with due
process. See Wash. Shoe Co. v. A-Z Sporting Goods
Inc., 704 F.3d 668, 672 (9th Cir. 2012). To satisfy due
process, a court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a
defendant only where the defendant has certain minimum
contacts with the forum state “such that the
maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions
of fair play and substantial justice.” Int'l
Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945).
categories of personal jurisdiction exist: (1) general
jurisdiction; and (2) specific jurisdiction. See
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466
U.S. 408, 413-15 (1984); see also LSI Indus., Inc. v.
Hubbell Lighting, Inc., 232 F.3d 1369, 1375 (Fed. Cir.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), a defendant may
rely on improper venue as a valid defense to a
plaintiff's claim. To withstand dismissal under Rule
12(b)(3), plaintiff bears the burden to establish that venue
is properly in this district. Nat'l Fitness Co. v.
Procore Labs., LLC, 2:10-cv-2168-JCM (RJJ), 2011 WL
2463296, at *1 (D. Nev. June 20, 2011) (citing Piedmont
Label Co. v. Sun ...