## Facts

- be2 LLC and be2 Holding, A.G. operated an international online dating service at be2.com.
- The plaintiffs alleged Nikolay V. Ivanov operated a competing matchmaking service through be2.net using a domain name and design confusingly similar to be2.com to mislead consumers.
- The complaint asserted trademark and unfair competition claims under the Lanham Act, federal common law, and the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
- Evidence offered to support relief included a declaration and website materials showing that, at one point, 10 men and 10 women with Chicago addresses had registered on be2.net.
- Ivanov asserted he was a New Jersey resident, had never been to Illinois, and had no Illinois ties other than the website being accessible there; he also disputed that he was a founder/CEO and characterized his involvement as limited assistance for a foreign company associated with the domain.

## Issues

1. Whether the Lanham Act provides nationwide personal jurisdiction over an alleged trademark infringer.
2. Whether operating an interactive website accessible in Illinois, with a small number of Illinois registrants, creates sufficient minimum contacts to support specific personal jurisdiction in Illinois for claims arising from the website.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit reversed the order denying Ivanov’s motion to vacate the default judgment.
- The court held Illinois lacked specific personal jurisdiction over Ivanov.
- The case was remanded with directions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

## Legal Principles

- The Lanham Act does not itself create nationwide personal jurisdiction; plaintiffs must satisfy state long-arm requirements and federal due process.
- Specific personal jurisdiction requires forum-related contacts showing purposeful direction or purposeful availment such that the defendant could reasonably anticipate being sued in the forum.
- Mere accessibility of a globally available website in the forum state is insufficient to establish minimum contacts.
- Forum residents’ unilateral decisions to access or register on a website, without forum-targeted conduct by the defendant, generally do not establish purposeful forum contacts.
- Even if the defendant played a significant operational role in the website, jurisdiction still turns on whether the defendant’s conduct was deliberately directed at the forum state.

## Conclusion

Because the record showed only an accessible website and a small number of Illinois users without Illinois-focused targeting, the exercise of specific personal jurisdiction in Illinois would not comport with due process, requiring dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction.


be2 LLC v. Ivanov, 642 F.3d 555 (7th Cir. 2011)