DD Support Board and Research Team

[scion]

12/08/2015 85 ORDER denying 29 motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), 12(b)(6) and Rule 9(b). Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (JDR) (Entered: 12/08/2015)


Doc 85 PDF file
https://www.scribd.com/doc/292774370/COR-Clearing-LLC-v-Calissio-Resources-Group-Inc-Et-Al-Doc-85-Filed-08-Dec-15

Extract -

DISCUSSION
I. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2)

The Court finds that plaintiff has satisfied its prima facie burden of showing that the Court has personal jurisdiction over Signature Stock. Signature Stock’s motion to dismiss contains only one substantive sentence with respect to its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Signature Stock states that it “has no connection to Nebraska nor [is] any of its business related to any commercial activity in Nebraska.” (Filing No. 30 at 4). However, as alleged in plaintiff’s complaint, the injury sustained by COR Clearing occurred within Nebraska. See generally Filing No. 1.

Furthermore, Signature Stock’s statement quoted above rings hollow considering: (1) Signature Stock’s communications with COR Clearing cited in COR Clearing’s affidavits accompanying its brief in opposition to Signature Stock’s motion; and (2) the far reaches of Signature Stock’s contacts given the nature of the business with which it is involved. Focusing on the central relationship between the defendant, the forum and the litigation, the Court finds exercising personal jurisdiction over Signature Stock would not violate constitutional limits. Signature Stock’s contacts with Nebraska analyzed in light of the facts and allegations giving rise to plaintiff’s claim comport with fair play and substantial justice and allow for the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2).
-