Most of us remember, with varying levels of fondness, studying the evolving doctrines of personal jurisdiction, Rule 12(b)(2) and the “minimum contacts” test in our civil procedure course. Those doctrines have continued to evolve in response to changing methods of travel, business arrangements, methods of communications and many other factors. One of the most recent changes has been the widespread phenomenon of employees working remotely.

In August, U.S. District Judge Kevin McNulty of the District of New Jersey granted a 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. It was a wrongful termination case filed by a New Jersey, tax-paying resident working full-time remotely for a corporation incorporated in Delaware, with its principal place of business in Maryland. An individual codefendant had no connection to New Jersey other than supervising and interacting with the plaintiff remotely. Tripp v. Ascentage Pharma Group International, Civ. No. 22-5934 (KM)(JBC).