Skidmore Energy, Inc. v. Maghreb Petroleum Exploration

*707 MEMORANDUM ***

In this case, the latest in a series of suits relating to a failed Moroccan venture, Skidmore Energy, Inc. appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing all defendants.

The bulk of the defendants were dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2). Because California’s long-arm statute is co-extensive with constitutional minimums, Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 410.10, we ask only whether sufficient minimum contacts were established. Boschetto v. Hansing, 539 F.3d 1011, 1015 (9th Cir.2008).

Most of the events in this case related to and occurred in Morocco. Skidmore itself is a Texas corporation. The major tie to California is a single preliminary meeting that occurred there.

Despite the paucity of California contacts, Skidmore argues that jurisdiction existed because the defendants’ out-of-state conduct had a substantial effect somewhere in the United States. The intentional act, however, was not aimed at California. See Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 788-89 , 104 S.Ct. 1482 , 79 L.Ed.2d 804 (1984). The effects were also not felt in California. Id. Indeed, if the conduct redounded anywhere in this country, it would…