meaningful 'contacts, ties, or relations."' Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 471-72, 105 S. Ct. 2174, 85 L. Ed. 2d 528 (1985) (quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 319, 66 S. Ct. 154, 90 L. Ed. 95 (1945)). Due process contemplates two types of personal jurisdiction: general jurisdi

onal notions of fair play and substantial justice. Grand Entertainment Group, Ltd. I Star Media Sales, Inc., 988 F.2d 476, 481 (3d C11993) (citing International Shoe Co. I Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945)). In making this determination we should consider the following: 1) the interests of the forum state; 2) t

of the Fourteenth Amendment's "minimum contacts" requirement. See In re Tutu Wells Contamination Litig., 846 F.Supp. 1243, 1264 (D.Vi.1993) (citing International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945)). When a defendant moves under Rule 12(b)(2) to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdict

the Fourteenth Amendment's "minimum contacts" requirement. See In re Tutu Wells Contamination Litig., 846 F. Supp. 1243, 1264 (D.V.I. 1993) (citing International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945)). When a defendant moves under Rule 12(b)(2) to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, the plaintiff must m