Buy This Entire Record For
Herman v. BRP, Inc.
Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle
March 24, 2015
CHARLES HERMAN, Plaintiffs,
BRP, INC., BRP US, INC., TELEFLEX CANADA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, TELEFLEX CANADA, INC., KONGSBERG, INC. (F/K/A TELEFLEX MEGATECH, INC.), and KONGSBERG AUTOMOTIVE HOLDING ASA, Defendants.
Kevin J. Connors, Esquire, Attorney for Defendants Kongsberg, Inc.
Timothy E. Lengkeek, Esquire, Attorney for Plaintiff.
Calvin L. Scott Jr. Judge
On this 24th day of March and upon Defendant Kongsberg, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, the Court finds:
Plaintiff Charles Herman ("Plaintiff") filed a Complaint against six separate defendants alleging causes of action based upon products liability and negligence, and a claim for punitive damages based upon an allegation of gross negligence. Defendant Kongsberg, Inc. ("Kongsberg") has moved to dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Del. Super. Ct. R. 12(b)(2) and based on Delaware's long-arm statute, 10 Del. C. § 3104.
On October 13, 2014, the Court sent a letter notifying Plaintiff's counsel that the Court was in receipt of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint to Plaintiff's counsel, and set the deadline for filing Plaintiff's response by November 14, 2014. The letter also stated, "[f]ailure to file a response by this date will be deemed a lack of opposition to the motion." To this date, Plaintiff has not filed a response to Defendant Kongsberg's motion. Therefore, the Court treats Defendant Kongsberg's motion as unopposed by ...