Whether the Federal Circuit erred in denying mandamus and failing to correct a district court ruling finding personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant that had no contacts in the forum state and did not control the shipment of products there

QUESTION PRESENTED There can be no personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant: when the only contact between that defendant and the forum state results from the “unilateral activity of another party or a third person.” Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 475 (1985). Moreover, contacts cannot be borrowed from a third party and attributed to a nonresident defendant to find personal jurisdiction. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco Cty., 137 S. Ct. 1773, 1783 (2017). The question presented is: 1. Whether the Federal Circuit erred in denying mandamus and failing to correct a district court ruling ; finding personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant that had no contacts in the forum state and did not control the shipment of products there. ; | . ii