Robert Carbone v. Wulf Kaal, et al.

140 F.4th 805 (6th Cir. 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · June 20, 2025 · No. 24-3795

Summary

This Sixth Circuit opinion addresses whether a federal district court in Ohio could exercise specific personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants who used websites hosted on servers located in Ohio. The court analyzed the purposeful availment and relatedness prongs of the specific jurisdiction test under the Due Process Clause, concluding that the mere transmission of defamatory statements through an Ohio-based server does not establish sufficient minimum contacts. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's defamation and related claims for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Mathis, Circuit Judge; Gilman, Circuit Judge; Davis, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
June 20, 2025
Docket number
24-3795
Procedural posture
Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of his diversity action for lack of personal jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2).
Standard of review
The Sixth Circuit reviewed de novo the district court's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. Because the district court decided the Rule 12(b)(2) motions without an evidentiary hearing, the court considered the pleadings and affidavits in the light most favorable to the nonmovant and did not weigh the controverting assertions of the party seeking dismissal.
Precedential value
Published and recommended for publication; precedential Sixth Circuit opinion.
Parties
Robert Carbone v. Wulf Kaal, Raphael Baumann, Michael Steuer, Open Source Standards Association, Emerging Technology Association, John and Jane Does 1–35
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

personal jurisdictionmotions to dismissdefamationcivil procedurecommercial litigation

Practice areas

civil procedurepersonal jurisdictiondefamationtortscommercial litigation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the defendants purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of acting in Ohio by using websites hosted on Ohio-based servers.
  2. Whether Carbone's claims arose from the defendants' activities in Ohio.
  3. Whether the district court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Holdings

  1. The defendants did not purposefully avail themselves of the privilege of acting in Ohio merely because websites they used were hosted on servers located in Ohio, where third-party vendors independently selected the server locations and the defendants did not target Ohio or its residents.
  2. Carbone's claims did not arise from the defendants' activities in Ohio because the allegedly tortious conduct consisted of writing and communicating statements and facilitating his removal elsewhere, not the physical transmission of information through an Ohio-based server.
  3. The district court properly dismissed the complaint because Carbone failed to make a prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction over the defendants.

Key quotations

The contacts must be the defendant’s own choice (at 809)
That the alleged defamatory statements traveled through an Ohio-based server establishes only “random, fortuitous, or attenuated contacts” with the State. (at 811)

Factual background

Robert Carbone, a Connecticut resident and member of two Swiss decentralized autonomous organizations, alleged that several defendants published false statements accusing him of sexual misconduct and facilitated his removal from the organizations. The organizations' websites were hosted on servers located in Ohio, but third-party vendors selected those server locations without direction from the defendants. Carbone did not allege that any party lived in, visited, or otherwise conducted independent business in Ohio, that the statements targeted Ohio residents, or that anyone in Ohio read the statements.

Procedural history

Robert Carbone sued the defendants in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio for defamation, tortious interference, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent misrepresentation. The defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and submitted evidence that third-party vendors independently selected Ohio as the location of servers hosting the organizations' websites. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, and Carbone appealed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…