Did the Supreme Court for the State of Rhode Island violate the full-faith-and-credit-clause by failing to uphold and enforce a Utah court's order finding personal-jurisdiction over the defendant?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Supreme Court for the State of Rhode Island violate the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution (Article IV, Section 1) by failing to uphold and enforce an order entered by a Utah court finding that it had personal jurisdiction over defendant after (1) defendant appeared for the purposes of challenging personal jurisdiction in the Utah court, (2) defendant submitted a motion, written argument, and affidavit to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, and (3) the Court, after consideration of the arguments, found that it had personal jurisdiction over defendant and denied the motion to dismiss? 2. Is the issue of personal jurisdiction “fully and fairly litigated” and an order denying a defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and finding that it has personal jurisdiction over defendant entitled to the full faith and credit under the United States Constitution after the defendant (1) makes a limited appearance to contest personal jurisdiction, (2) files a motion to dismiss, supporting affidavit, and written arguments contesting personal jurisdiction, but (3) withdraws from the proceedings prior to oral argument and fails to further contest personal jurisdiction?