The IT Law Wiki


Courts evaluate purposeful direction using the three-part effects test, taken from the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Calder v. Jones.[1] Under this test, “the defendant allegedly must have (1) committed an intentional act, (2) expressly aimed at the forum state, (3) causing harm that the defendant knows is likely to be suffered in the forum state.”[2] There is no requirement that the defendant have any physical contacts with the forum.[3]

"A purposeful direction analysis . . . is most often used in suits sounding in tort."[4]


  1. 465 U.S. 783 (1984). See Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 803 (9th Cir. 2004) (full-text).
  2. Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et L'Antisemitisme, 433 F.3d 1199, 1206 (9th Cir. 2006) (full-text) (en banc) (internal quotation marks omitted).
  3. See Schwarzenegger, 374 F.3d at 803.
  4. Id. at 802 (internal citations omitted).