Whether the Due Process Clause permits a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant based on the contacts of the defendant's alleged co-conspirators with the forum State

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Due Process Clause permits a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant based on the contacts of the defendant’s alleged co-conspirators with the forum State, as the court below held; or whether the due process analysis looks only to the defendant’s own contacts with the forum State and not those of alleged co-conspirators, as the Nebraska and Texas Supreme Courts have held. (D II RULE 29.6 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29.6, petitioner MCC (Xiangtan) Heavy Industrial Equipment Co., Ltd. (“MCC”) provides the following disclosure statement: Capital Engineering & Research Incorporation Ltd. (“CERI”) owns a majority of MCC’s shares. CERI is a wholly owned subsidiary of China Metallurgical Construction Corp., which is wholly owned by the Chinese government’s State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Counsel. Xiangtan Steel Group Company Ltd. (“Xiangtan Steel”) owns a minority of MCC’s shares. Xiangtan Steel is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hunan Valin Tron & Steel Group Co., Ltd., which is wholly owned by the Chinese government’s State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of Hunan Province.