Cutera, Inc. v. The Ozoned Studio Med Spa, LLC
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CUTERA, INC., Case No. 22-cv-04054-VC
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
v. DISMISS
THE OZONED STUDIO MED SPA, LLC, Re: Dkt. No. 22 et al., Defendants.
The motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied. Federal law governs the enforcement of forum selection clauses in diversity cases. Manetti-Farrow, Inc. v. Gucci America, Inc., 858 F.2d 509, 513 (9th Cir. 1988). And a valid forum selection clause in a contract constitutes consent to personal jurisdiction. Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc., 39 F.3d 1398, 1406–07 (9th Cir. 1994). Here, Ozoned does not dispute that Behlar signed the contract on its behalf. Nor does Ozoned make any arguments specific to the forum selection clause. Instead, Ozoned contends that the agreed-to contract really contained an additional term that conditioned the deal on an otherwise unrelated real estate transaction. This dispute over the terms of the contract is an “action brought relating to [the] Agreement” that “shall be heard and determined . . . exclusively in San Mateo County Superior Court, California, or the United States…