Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty.

582 U.S. 255 · Supreme Court of the United States · 2017

Facts

Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in New York, was sued in California by over 600 plaintiffs, most of whom were non-California residents, alleging injuries from the drug Plavix. The nonresident plaintiffs did not purchase, ingest, or suffer injury from Plavix in California, nor did BMS develop or market Plavix there. The California Supreme Court found specific jurisdiction over the nonresidents' claims based on BMS's extensive general contacts with the state and the similarity of claims to those of California residents.

Issue

Does the Due Process Clause permit a state court to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant for claims brought by nonresident plaintiffs when there is no connection between the forum state and the plaintiffs' claims, even if the defendant has extensive general contacts with the forum state and resident plaintiffs have similar claims?

Holding

No. The Supreme Court reversed the California Supreme Court, holding that California courts lack specific personal jurisdiction over the nonresident plaintiffs' claims because there was no adequate connection between the forum state and the specific claims at issue.

Rule

For specific personal jurisdiction to exist, the suit must "arise out of or relate to the defendant's contacts with the forum," meaning there must be an "affiliation between the forum and the underlying controversy." A defendant's extensive general business contacts with a state, or the mere similarity of claims between forum residents and nonresidents, is insufficient to establish specific jurisdiction if the nonresident plaintiffs' claims do not arise from the defendant's activities within the forum state.

Read the full opinion on CourtListener

Case brief last reviewed 2026-04-18. Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.