Beijing Da De Chao Rui Commerce etc. v. Tao Yun Capital CA2/8

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs obtained what they refer to as seven “consent judgments” against defendant in the PRC. Before the trial court, defendant characterized these differently, calling them “Civil Mediation Statements.” Each offered declarations concerning the effect of PRC law in support of their respective characterizations. We will refer to the documents as “consent judgments” for convenience only. In 2021, plaintiffs filed in the trial court their complaint for recognition of the consent judgments against defendant, three other PRC corporations, and a PRC individual. This appeal pertains only to defendant, so we disregard the other defendants below in our recitation of the facts. In response to the complaint, defendant filed a motion to quash service of process for lack of personal jurisdiction. In support of its motion, defendant argued its contacts with California did not establish jurisdiction under a traditional minimum contacts personal jurisdiction analysis. In opposition, plaintiffs argued the traditional jurisdictional analysis was inapplicable because the proceeding was only to recognize a foreign-country money judgment under California’s enactment of the Uniform…