Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Before
Lynch, Selya, and Kayatta,
Circuit Judges.
Seawind
Key
Investments,
Limited
("Seawind"),
and
We easily affirm.
Background
See Adelson v.
During negotiations,
Under the
services
under
the
contract.
Addressed
to
Copia's
claims
in
contract,
tort,
and
equity,
and
under
Both defendants
A.
Analysis
Standard of Review
The district court based its jurisdictional ruling on
C.W. Downer
& Co. v. Bioriginal Food & Sci. Corp., 771 F.3d 59, 65 (1st Cir.
- 4 -
2014).
"proffered
evidence
that,
if
credited,
is
enough
to
support
Inc. v. Babcock & Wilcox Can., 46 F.3d 138, 145 (1st Cir. 1995)).
B.
carry
its
burden
of
proving
that
personal
See Daynard
v. Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, P.A., 290 F.3d 42,
52 (1st Cir. 2002) (citing "Automatic" Sprinkler Corp. of Am. v.
Seneca Foods Corp., 280 N.E.2d 423, 424 (Mass. 1972)).
Recently,
Excel Corp., 804 F.3d 13, 1819 (1st Cir. 2015) (citing Good Hope
Indus., Inc. v. Ryder Scott Co., 389 N.E.2d 76, 80 (Mass. 1979)).
We need not address this possible tension in our precedent here,
- 5 -
however,
because
both
defendants
treat
the
statutory
and
constitutional inquiry.
Under the Fifth Amendment, a court may exercise general
or specific jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant only if
that defendant has "certain minimum contacts with [the forum state]
such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend 'traditional
notions of fair play and substantial justice.'"
S.A. v. Brown, 131 S. Ct. 2846, 2851 (2011) (quoting Int'l Shoe,
326
U.S.
at
Massachusetts
317).
may
Because
exercise
Copia
general
waives
any
argument
jurisdiction
over
that
the
Massachusetts
represent
purposeful
availment
of
the
C.
Purposeful Availment
In
condition
determining
is
satisfied,
whether
our
the
"key
purposeful
focal
availment
points"
are
the
the
foreseeability
of
the
Massachusetts's jurisdiction.
defendants
falling
subject
to
As an
No
50,
2005)
6061
(1st
Cir.
(contacts
relevant
for
specific
sought
Massachusetts
no
and
privilege
did
nothing
to
conduct
to
invoke
any
the
activities
in
benefits
and
defendant's
awareness
as
of
plaintiff's
identically
- 8 -
location
situated
for
in
forum
ease
of
state,
combined
with
defendant's
occasional
transmission
of
Seawind's
receipt
of
equipment
shipped
by
Copia points
Copia
from
Burger King
And
It does not.
Id. at 63.
in-forum
services,
and
the
plaintiff's
actual
21.
here.
In sum, Seawind did no more than welcome in Jamaica
Copia's offer to provide equipment and services to Seawind in
Jamaica, and Seawind had no relevant contact with Massachusetts
beyond the insubstantial contacts that anyone would have when
buying goods and services from a company that itself happens to be
in Massachusetts.
The
the
Conclusion
unconsented
exercise
of
personal