English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

A court must have personal jurisdiction over a defendant in order to pass judgment on the underlying merits of a claim.' Personal jurisdiction requires both compliance with due process and a statutory basis:2 constitutional due process requires that the defendants have minimum contacts with the forum;3 the statutory basis requires that a statute authorize the exercise of jurisdiction and may be satisfied by state statutes of general application in federal courts.4 If federal plaintiffs borrow from state statutes, the federal court must determine whether the defendant has the requisite minimum contacts with the state to exercise personal jurisdiction.5 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(k)(1) encapsulates this traditional standard.6 When a defendant does not have minimum contacts with any single forum state to comport with due process under traditional Rule 4(k)(1),7 Rule 4(k)(2)8 may provide a means of exercising personal jurisdiction to enforce a federal claim. If such a defendant has sufficient contacts nationwide to comport with due process, then a federal court may subject the defendant to its jurisdiction under Rule 4(k)(2).9 In

Shifting the Burden of Production under Rule 4(k)(2): A Cost-Minimizing Approach