Sands v. Reimers

50 F.3d 16 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Robert L. SANDS, and, d/b/a Sands and Associates, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen D. REIMERS, an individual; and d/b/a Hyperbaric Therapy, Inc., and d/b/a Reimers Engineering, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-56250. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 9, 1995. * Decided March 17, 1995. Before: BROWNING, BOOCHEVER, and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 I. Personal Jurisdiction over HTI and Reimers 3 The district court correctly determined it had personal jurisdiction over HTI. Moreover, because we affirm the district court's conclusion that Reimers and HTI were alter egos, see infra part III, the finding of personal jurisdiction over HTI also established jurisdiction over Reimers. See Flynt Distributing Co. v. Harvey, 734 F.2d 1389, 1393 (9th Cir.1984). 4 HTI's contacts with California were sufficient to satisfy the "minimum contacts" test for personal jurisdiction set forth in…