Forest v. Trans Carriers, Inc.
Case Date: 10/18/1995
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 95-1529
|
October 18, 1995 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 95-1529 BETSY FOREST, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. TRANS CARRIERS, INC., Defendant, Appellee. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE [Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ____________________ Before Selya, Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________ ____________________ Mark S. Kierstead on brief for appellant. _________________ Peter T. Marchesi on brief for appellee. _________________ ____________________ ____________________ Per Curiam. We have carefully reviewed the record in __________ this case and affirm the dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. The record indicates that, although much of the information would have been available to her from the proper sources, plaintiff failed to place in the record the "specific facts" necessary to support her jurisdictional allegation. Boit v. Gar-Tec Products, Inc., 967 F.2d 671, ____ ______________________ 680 (1st Cir. 1992). The record likewise shows that plaintiff never asked that the court permit discovery on the limited issue of personal jurisdiction. See id. ___ __ Consequently, plaintiff has not met her burden, id. at 675, __ of showing that defendant's contacts with Maine were sufficiently "substantial" or sufficiently "continuous and systematic" so that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over it in this case would comport with due process. Affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1. ________ ___ |