Asad

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff Izzedin Asad appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his diversity action for lack of personal jurisdiction over defendants. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction, Ziegler v. Indian River County, 64 F.3d 470, 473 (9th Cir.1995), and we reverse and remand.

I. BACKGROUND

Asad, a Montana resident, is sole proprietor of XyzzT Enterprises, an export business located in Great Falls, Montana. In his complaint, Asad alleged that he contracted with Tubeworks, Inc., a California company, to deliver balloon products to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. After arriving in Dubai to receive the shipment, Asad learned that Tubeworks would not deliver because it had been advised by Continental American Corporation, a Kansas company doing business as Pioneer Balloon, that Asad was a bad credit risk. Asad also alleged that Pioneer induced two certified balloon artists to discontinue negotiations with him.

II. DISCUSSION

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing personal jurisdiction. Ziegler, 64 F.3d at 473 . Where the district court did not hold an evidentiary hearing and make…

I respectfully dissent. The majority finds that the district court had specific *628 personal jurisdiction over Defendants Pioneer Balloon and Tubeworks, Inc. The district court, however, never addressed that issue. Instead, the district court, when dismissing Plaintiff Asad’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction, made findings with respect to general personal jurisdiction only. Nothing in the record indicates Asad contended before the district court that Defendants were subject to specific personal jurisdiction. The record before us is, therefore, insufficiently developed to permit review of the specific personal jurisdiction issue.

As pointed out by the majority, the record before the district court contained certain facts which could possibly support specific personal jurisdiction over Defendants. However, the matter should be remanded to allow the district court to develop the factual record with respect to specific personal jurisdiction before that issue is reviewed by this Court. See Chan v. Society Expeditions, Inc., 39 F.3d 1398, 1406, 1410 (9th Cir.1994)(vacating and remanding district court’s order when district court did not' consider the issue of personal…