Ingrid Peterson v. William Morris, IV

MEMORANDUM

Ingrid Peterson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her diversity action alleging libel based on a local Alaska newspaper article about criminal charges being filed against her sons. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction, Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 800 (9th Cir.2004), and the denial of a motion for remand, D-Beam Ltd. P’ship v. Roller Derby Skates, Inc., 366 F.3d 972 , 974 n. 2 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Peterson’s action against defendant William S. Morris IV because Peterson failed to establish that Morris had certain minimum contacts with the State of Alaska such that the maintenance of her suit there would not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Marina Salina Cruz, 649 F.2d 1266 , 1269-70 (9th Cir.1981) (setting forth test for general or specific personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant under Alaska’s long-arm statute) (citations and internal quotation marks omitfed); see also Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 319 , 66 S.Ct. 154 , 90…