Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. Combined Management, Inc.

Good Law
371 F. App'x 834
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 24, 201008-15014California712 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs-Appellants Applied Underwriters, Inc. and Applied Risk Services, Inc. (collectively, “Applied”) brought a breach of contract action in California against Defendant-Appellee Combined Management, Inc. (“Combined”). The district court granted Combined’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction de novo. Pebble Beach Co. v. Caddy, 453 F.3d 1151, 1154 (9th Cir.2006). If the district court decides the motion without an evidentiary hearing, as it did here, then the plaintiff need only make a prima facie showing of jurisdictional facts. See id.

Combined is a Maine corporation that does not regularly conduct business outside of Maine. The Applied entities are Nebraska corporations, but they are licensed to do business in California and their “home office” is in San Francisco, California. The contract at issue is a workers compensation insurance policy that was negotiated exclusively via telephone and mail between Applied employees in California and Combined employees in Maine. Activities related to the administration of the policy were…

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.