Jack Ryfeul v. The Mirage

9 F.3d 1553 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Jack RYFEUL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The MIRAGE, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-35586. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 20, 1993. * Decided Oct. 22, 1993. 1 Before: BEEZER, KOZINSKI, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Jack Ryfeul appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his diversity action for lack of personal jurisdiction under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2). We have jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court's dismissal de novo, Steel v. United States, 813 F.2d 1545, 1548 (9th Cir.1987), and we affirm. 4 Ryfeul contends that the district court erred in dismissing his action for lack of personal jurisdiction because the Nevada defendants had sufficient contacts with the State of Alaska to justify litigation in that forum. 1 We disagree. Personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant is determined by a three prong test: (1) does the…