In this conference, with its focus on article 65 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, it seems to me that a convenient definition would include jurisdiction, choice of law, ind judgments but would also extend into international civil procedure far enough to pick up judicial cooperation on matters such as service and evidence I PREEMINENCE OF JURISDICTION IN U.S. PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW Given this broad definition of private international law, and given the federal structure of the United States, it is safe to say that private international law, by whatever name, has huge importance in the United States. That fact explains why jurisdiction above all typically occupies(although usually with an appended study of res judicata )the most substantial part of the major first-year law course on civil procedure. Also, the U.S. situation incidentally helps to explain why the typical upperclass course on conflicts of law, which mostly emphasizes choice of law, ignores international cases in favor of interstate cases. Outside the academy, lawyers in the United States expend significant time, energy, and other resources on the process of forum selection. They know that the "name of the game is II Article 65, effective in 1999, pro vides Measures in the field of judicial co-operation in civil matters having cross-border implications, to be ken in accordance with Article 67 and insofar as necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market, hall include (a) improving and simplifying the system for cross-border service of judicial and extrajudicial documents co-operation in the taking of evidence, the reco gnition and enforcement of decisions in civil and commercial cases, including ecisions in extrajudicial cases; promoting the compatibility of the rules applicable in the Member States concerning the conflict of laws and of jurisdiction liminating obstacles to the good functioning of civil proceedings, if necessary by promoting the compatibility of the rules on civil procedure applicable in the Member States I ENCYCLOPEDIA OF EUROPEAN UNION LAW 3-0074(Neville March Hunnings gen ed, 2003); see Michael Wilderspin New Possibilities for Cooperation with the European Union-The Transfer of Competence for Judicial Cooperation from Member States to Community Institutions: The Foundations and the Implementation of the Transferof Competence in the Area of Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters to the Community Institutions, 21 J.L. CoM. 181(2002)(nicely ronicling the communitarization of private international law ) See Stephen B. Burbank, The Reluctant Partner: Making Procedural Law for International Civil Litigation LAW CoNTEMP PROBS., Summer 1994, at 103, 127-35(treating judicial cooperation See generally roBert C CASAD KEvin M. Clermont, REs JUDICATA: A HANDBOOK ON ITS THEORY, DOCTRINE, AND PRACTICE(2001) IAt Cornell Law School, jurisdiction and judgments occupy one-halfof the six-credit course in civil procedur which equals the biggest course in the curriculum See, e. g, RICHMAN REYNOLDS, supra note 7,81: EUGENE F SCOLES, PETER HAY, PATRICK J BORCHERS sYMEon C SYmEoniDEs, CoNFLICT OF LAWs$ 1.3(3d ed 2000)3 11Article 65, effective in 1999, provides: Measures in the field of judicial co-operation in civil matters having cross-border implications, to be taken in accordance with Article 67 and insofar as necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market, shall include: (a) improving and simplifying: – the system for cross-border service of judicial and extrajudicial documents, – co-operation in the taking of evidence, – the recognition and enforcement of decisions in civil and commercial cases, including decisions in extrajudicial cases; (b) promoting the compatibility of the rules applicable in the Member States concerning the conflict of laws and of jurisdiction; (c) eliminating obstacles to the good functioning of civil proceedings, if necessary by promoting the compatibility of the rules on civil procedure applicable in the Member States. 1 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF EUROPEAN UNION LAW 3-0074 (Neville March Hunnings gen. ed., 2003); see Michael Wilderspin, New Possibilities for Cooperation with the European Union—The Transfer of Competence for Judicial Cooperation from Member States to Community Institutions: The Foundations and the Implementation of the Transfer of Competence in the Area of Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters to the Community Institutions, 21 J.L. & COM. 181 (2002) (nicely chronicling the communitarization of private international law). 12See Stephen B. Burbank, The Reluctant Partner: Making Procedural Law for International Civil Litigation, LAW & CONTEMP. PROBS., Summer 1994, at 103, 127-35 (treating judicial cooperation). 13See generally ROBERT C. CASAD & KEVIN M. CLERMONT, RES JUDICATA: A HANDBOOK ON ITS THEORY, DOCTRINE, AND PRACTICE (2001). 14At Cornell Law School, jurisdiction and judgments occupy one-half of the six-credit course in civil procedure, which equals the biggest course in the curriculum. 15See, e.g., RICHMAN & REYNOLDS, supra note 7, § 1; EUGENE F. SCOLES, PETER HAY, PATRICK J. BORCHERS & SYMEON C. SYMEO NIDES, CONFLICT OF LAWS § 1.3 (3d ed. 2000). In this conference, with its focus on article 65 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community,11 it seems to me that a convenient definition would include jurisdiction, choice of law, and judgments but would also extend into international civil procedure far enough to pick up judicial cooperation on matters such as service and evidence.12 I. PREEMINENCE OF JURISDICTION IN U.S. PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW Given this broad definition of private international law, and given the federal structure of the United States, it is safe to say that private international law, by whatever name, has huge importance in the United States. That fact explains why jurisdiction above all typically occupies (although usually with an appended study of res judicata13) the most substantial part of the major first-year law course on civil procedure.14 Also, the U.S. situation incidentally helps to explain why the typical upperclass course on conflicts of law, which mostly emphasizes choice of law, ignores international cases in favor of interstate cases.15 Outside the academy, lawyers in the United States expend significant time, energy, and other resources on the process of forum selection. They know that the “name of the game is