EFCO Corp. v. Aluma Systems USA, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS
| Decision Date | 10 September 2001 |
| Docket Number | PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,No. 01-1255,DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES,01-1255 |
| Citation | 268 F.3d 601 |
| Parties | (8th Cir. 2001) EFCO CORP., FORMERLY KNOWN AS ECONOMY FORMS CORPORATION; EFCO CANADA CO., v. ALUMA SYSTEMS USA, INC.; ALUMA SYSTEMS, CORP., A SUBSIDIARY OF TRIDEL ENTERPRISES INC.; ALUMA SYSTEMS CANADA, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF ALUMA SYSTEMS CORP. Submitted: |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
Before Morris Sheppard Arnold, Bright, Circuit Judges, and KYLE,* District Judge.
In this action, the plaintiffs ("EFCO"), a group of interrelated corporations with their headquarters in Des Moines, Iowa, sought injunctive relief and damages against the several defendants ("Aluma") for alleged misappropriation by Aluma of EFCO's confederated proprietary information. Prior to filing this action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, EFCO sued Aluma in Canada for a variety of claims that substantially overlap with the claims asserted in this case. At EFCO's request, the Canadian suit was dismissed without prejudice. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss this case on the grounds of forum non conveniens. The district court granted the defendants' motion, and this appeal followed. We affirm the judgment of the district court.
A trial court has broad discretion in deciding a motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens and that decision will be overturned only for abuse of discretion. Reid-Walen v. Hansen, 933 F.2d 1390, 1394 (8th Cir. 1991). Abuse of discretion occurs when the district court does not hold the defendants to their burden of persuasion on all the elements of the forum non conveniens analysis, fails to consider the relevant public and private interest factors established in Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235, 257 (1981), or clearly errs in weighing the Piper Aircraft factors. Reid-Whalen, 933 F.2d at 1394.
We affirm on the basis of the district court's published opinion, EFCO Corp. v. Aluma Systems USA, Inc., 145 F. Supp. 2d 1040 (S.D. Iowa 2000), with these comments.
In its briefs and at oral argument, Aluma emphasized that on October 20, 2000, EFCO formally substituted EFCO Canada Company, a Nova Scotia corporation, as one of the two plaintiffs. Judge Pratt's opinion does not reflect this change in the identity of the plaintiffs. This change in plaintiffs does not affect Judge Pratt's ruling.
We note Judge Pratt's discussion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
EIG Energy Fund XIV, L.P. v. Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.
...1038, 1040 (7th Cir. 2006) ; Guidi v. Inter–Continental Hotels Corp. , 224 F.3d 142, 147 (2d Cir. 2000) ; cf. EFCO Corp. v. Aluma Sys. USA, Inc. , 268 F.3d 601, 603 (8th Cir. 2001) (acknowledging that a plaintiff's involvement in international commerce may discount choice-of-forum deference......
-
Ideal Instruments v. Rivard Instruments
...turn quotes Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235, 241 n. 6, 102 S.Ct. 252, 70 L.Ed.2d 419 (1981)); with EFCO Corp. v. Aluma Sys. USA, Inc., 268 F.3d 601, 603 (8th Cir.2001) ("A trial court has broad discretion in deciding a motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens and that decis......
-
J.C. Renfroe & Sons, Inc. v. Renfroe Japan Co.
...v. Bank of Israel, 801 F.Supp. 1068, 1073 (S.D.N.Y.1992), aff'd 990 F.2d 71, 71-72 (2d Cir.1993)); see also EFCO Corp. v. Aluma Systems USA, Inc., 268 F.3d 601, 602 (8th Cir.2001) ("[w]hether or not an American corporation which chooses an American forum for its lawsuit will have its choice......
-
Rothluebbers v. Obee
...70 L.Ed.2d 419 (1981), or clearly errs in weighing the Piper Aircraft factors. Reid-Walen, 933 F.2d at 1394. EFCO Corp. v. Aluma Systems USA, Inc., 268 F.3d 601, 603 (8th Cir.2001). ANALYSIS AND FORUM NON CONVENIENS [¶ 6.] Rothluebbers and Jacob argue that the common law doctrine of forum n......