## Facts

- Taiwanese hemophiliacs (or their representatives), all residents of Taiwan, sued U.S. manufacturers of Factor VIII/IX clotting-factor concentrates, alleging the products were contaminated with HIV.
- Plaintiffs alleged the manufacturers could and should have reduced HIV contamination risk, including through heat-treatment during manufacturing.
- Plaintiffs claimed they contracted HIV in Taiwan after using the clotting-factor products there.
- The case was consolidated into a federal multidistrict litigation proceeding in the Northern District of Illinois concerning HIV-contaminated clotting factors.
- The district court dismissed the action, and plaintiffs appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court properly dismissed the Taiwanese plaintiffs’ claims under forum non conveniens in favor of litigation in Taiwan.
2. Whether the forum non conveniens analysis applicable to similar foreign-plaintiff clotting-factor litigation supported dismissal where the injuries, plaintiffs, and much evidence were located abroad.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal.
- The court treated the case as materially similar to prior foreign-injury clotting-factor litigation and applied the same forum non conveniens approach.
- The court concluded there were strong reasons to litigate in Taiwan rather than in a U.S. forum.
- The court resolved the appeal without oral argument, finding the record and briefs sufficient given the case’s close relationship to earlier, similar appeals.

## Legal Principles

- Forum non conveniens permits dismissal when strong reasons indicate the dispute should be litigated in another jurisdiction, typically a foreign forum.
- Dismissal is appropriate when an adequate alternative forum exists and the private- and public-interest factors favor the foreign forum, including:
  - the location of plaintiffs, witnesses, medical treatment, and other evidence abroad;
  - the burden and cost of conducting discovery and trial far from the center of events; and
  - the foreign jurisdiction’s interest in resolving injuries and regulatory concerns affecting its residents.
- The fact that defendants are U.S. companies does not bar forum non conveniens dismissal when the case is predominantly foreign-centered.

## Conclusion

The court held that Taiwan was the appropriate forum for Taiwanese plaintiffs’ HIV-contamination claims arising from clotting-factor use in Taiwan and affirmed dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds.


Chang v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 599 F.3d 728 (7th Cir. 2010)