Mackenzie

Prime Capital, HR v. Mackenzie

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 7, 20253:25-cv-00570California1,207 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

26 Plaintiff Prime Capital HR, a corporation organized under the laws of California, 27 and with a place of business in Escondido, California, filed this lawsuit on March 10, 2025. 28 1 Ian Robert Mackenzie, a resident and citizen of the United Kingdom. Id. ¶10. 2 Subsequently, Plaintiff sent Defendant three loan disbursements in the amounts of $40,000, 3 $40,000, and $45,000, respectively. Id. ¶ 10, Ex. A. After receiving the disbursements, 4 Defendant failed to repay the loan, and ceased communication with Plaintiff regarding 5 payment of the loan. Id. ¶ 14. 6 On April 14, 2025, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal 7 jurisdiction. ECF No. 3. On June 11, 2025, the Court issued the Order granting Defendant’s 8 motion. ECF No. 8. The Court determined that the Complaint contained “no allegations 9 specifically relating to personal jurisdiction over Defendant,” as well as no non-conclusory 10 allegations “regarding events occurring within the State of California or within the 11 Southern District of California.” Id. at 2. The Court further determined that Plaintiff’s 12 opposition brief …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.