Datasets:
title: 'House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12) (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017875)'
source: 'House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12)'
sourceUrl: https://www.justice.gov/epstein
date: '2026-01-01'
category: House Oversight
eftaNumber: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017875
ocrPages: 1
ocrChars: 3749
ocrElapsed: 0
parseTier: external-legacy
engine: engine undisclosed (ep-nov-12.greg.technology mirror)
externalSource: greg-ep-nov-12
externalLicense: not granted
externalCredit: ep-nov-12.greg.technology
externalUrl: https://ep-nov-12.greg.technology
810 349 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES Court declines to adopt this standard. does not offend traditional notions of fair There was no question that, at a minimum, play and substantial justice." Int'l Shoe the defendants in these products liability Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316, 66 actions had substantial contacts with the S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945); see also forum, in these cases being New York, and World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Wood- were involved in the sale or production of son, 414 U.S. 286, 292, 100 S.Ct. 559, 62 the products at issue. In re DES Cases, L.Ed.2d 490 (1980). The minimum con- 789 F.Supp. at 559; Simon, 86 F.Supp.2d at 99-100. Here, however, there are ques- tacts requirement is also known as "fair tions as to the Defendants' contacts with warning," such that the defendant's con- the forum, whether it be the United States tacts with the forum should be sufficient generally or New York specifically, and to make it reasonable to be haled into the Defendants' alleged involvement with court there. Burger King, 471 U.S. at al Qaeda is much more attenuated. 474, 105 S.Ct. 2174. The "'fair warning' requirement is satisfied if the defendant B. Due Process Requirements [46-49] Any exercise of personal juris- diction must comport with the require- ments of due process. "The due process test for personal jurisdiction has two relat- ed components: the "minimum inquiry and the 'reasonableness' inquiry." Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Robertson-Ceco Corp., 84 F.3d 560, 567 (2d Cir.1996). De- pending on the basis for personal jurisdic- tion, due process under either the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendment applies. "[T]he due process analysis is basically the same under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The principal difference is that under the Fifth Amendment the court consider the defendant's contacts throughout the United States, while under the Fourteenth Amendment only the con- tacts with the forum state may be consid- ered." Chew v. Dietrich, 143 F.3d 24, 28 n. 4 (2d Cir.1998). Here, personal jurisdie- tion under the New York long-arm statute requires minimum contacts with New York pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment. The exercise of personal jurisdiction under Rule 4(k) requires contacts with the Unit- ed States as a whole pursuant to the Fifth Amendment. has 'purposefully directed' his activities at the residents of the forum ... and the litigation results from alleged injuries that 'arise out of or relate to' those activities." Id. (internal citations omitted); see also World-Wide Volkswagen, 444 U.S. at 297- 98, 100 S.Ct. 559 (finding purposefully di- rected activities where defendant delivered products into stream of commerce with ex- pectation they would be purchased by resi- dents of forum); Calder, 465 U.S. at 789- 90, 104 S.Ct. 1482 (finding publishing ac- tivities outside of forum were calculated to cause injury to plaintiff in forum where she lived and which also had the highest subscription rate). "Although it has been argued that foreseeability of causing inju- ry in another State should be sufficient to establish such contacts there when policy considerations so require, the Court has consistently held that this kind of foresee- ability is not a 'sufficient benchmark' for exercising personal jurisdiction." Burger King, 471 U.S. at 474, 105 S.Ct. 2174 (quoting World-Wide Volkswagen, 111 U.S. at 295, 100 S.Ct. 559). In every case, there must be "some act by which the defendant purposefully avails itself of the
- Minimum Contacts [50, 51] Minimum contacts are re- quired so "that the maintenance of the suit privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws." Id. (quoting HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017875