Hedeen International, LLC v. Zing Toys, Inc.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss instant breach of contract claim based on defendant’s contention that plaintiff lacked personal jurisdiction over it, where instant action was filed in Wisconsin and defendant’s controlling shareholder was native of Australia, who had never visited Wisconsin. Ct. rejected plaintiff’s claim that defendant’s motion was untimely under Rules 12(a), 12(h), where Ct. found that although 21-day rule contained in Rule 12 applied to responsive pleadings to complaints that assert affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, it did not apply to instant motion to dismiss.