Attorneys obtained dismissal of the claims against our client on a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction

Attorneys obtained dismissal of the claims against our client on a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.  Our client was a consultant to one of the largest fitness club operators in the United States, responsible for overseeing a complex software project to implement a "global information management system" for the fitness club operator.  Plaintiff, a software developer, alleged that both the fitness club operator and our client fraudulently solicited plaintiff to continue working on the project after the project was halted. Since the claim was brought in the state District Court and our client is an out of state entity that performed work in the state on behalf of the fitness club operator, we argued that there were insufficient contacts with the state for personal jurisdiction to attach.  Plaintiff argued that specific jurisdiction (as opposed to general jurisdiction) existed under the "effects test" set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783 (1984).  Alternatively, plaintiff requested jurisdictional discovery.  We successfully argued that the "effects test" was not met since plaintiff could not establish that our client expressly aimed his alleged conduct at the state.  Further, plaintiff's request for jurisdictional discovery was denied as a mere "fishing expedition."