Paulsson v. Dorosz, No. 13-55413 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseSeismic Reservoir 2020, Inc. (Seismic), a California company, brought suit against Bjorn Paulsson. Paulsson counterclaimed against two Canadian directors of Seismic arising from his status as a shareholder and director of Seismic’s parent company, a corporation existing under the laws of Province of Alberta, Canada. Paulsson sought damages for breach of fiduciary duties owed by directors of the Alberta company under section 242 of the Alberta Business Corporations Act. The district court dismissed the counterclaim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of jurisdiction, concluding that it could not issue a remedy under the Alberta statute. A panel of the Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding (1) the district court had jurisdiction to entertain the controversy; and (2) the district court should have dismissed Paulsson’s counterclaim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a cause of action rather than under Rule 12(b)(1) because Paulsson’s counterclaim arising under the Alberta Act did not raise a cause of action for which the district court could grant relief.
Court Description: Jurisdiction. The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Bjorn Paulsson’s counterclaim seeking damages for breach of fiduciary duties owed by directors of an Alberta company under § 242 of the Alberta Business Corporations Act. The panel held that the district court had jurisdiction to entertain the controversy, but Paulsson’s counterclaim arising under the Alberta Act did not raise a cause of action for which the district court could grant relief. The panel concluded that the district court should have dismissed Paulsson’s counterclaim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a cause of action rather than under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of jurisdiction. The panel noted that there was no occasion to remand to provide Paulsson an opportunity to amend his pleadings because he could not possibly win relief in the district court where the right created PAULSSON V. DOROSZ 3 by § 242 of the Alberta Act can only be enforced in the designated tribunal – the Queens Bench of Alberta.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.