system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: contracts by mail or otherwise with a Texas resident and either party is to perform the contract in whole or in part in this State; (2) commits a tort in whole or in part in this State; or (3) recruits Texas residents, directly or through an intermediary located in this State, for employment inside or outside this State. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 17.042 (Vernon 1997). 7 . However, because we conclude below that PVF's contacts are sufficient to support specific jurisdiction, we do not address general jurisdiction. 8 . The factors to be considered include: (1) the burden on the defendant; (2) the interests of the forum state in adjudicating the dispute; (3) the plaintiff's interest in obtaining convenient and effective relief; (4) the intersta 622 F.2d 149, 150 (5th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>); Beechem v. Pippin, 686 S.W.2d 356, 358 Options: A. holding there was no general jurisdiction even though defendant sent its chief executive officer to texas for a contract negotiation session accepted into its bank account checks drawn on a bank in texas purchased 4 million of goods and equipment from a company in texas and sent employees to texas for training and technical consultation B. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident printing customer despite the fact that texas printer solicited the business in alabama and nonresident sent no personnel to texas because nonresident placed additional orders from which it expected to profit sent payments to texas sent and received printing materials to and from texas paid for shipping of printed goods from texas and sent payments to texas the transactions were governed by texas law and substantial part of performance occurred in texas C. holding that jurisdiction existed over two georgia residents who leased a machine from a texas resident because they 1 solicited and negotiated the lease agreement by two telephone calls to texas 2 sent correspondence and payments by mail to texas 3 paid for the transfer of the machine from texas and 4 caused their insurance agent to contact the texas resident in texas to arrange coverage for the machine D. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law not arizona law should be applied E. holding no jurisdiction over nonresident customer where contract was solicited negotiated and consummated in oklahoma for billboards to be built in texas and erected in oklahoma payments were made to texas and defendant would not earn a profit from texas and had no other contact with texas

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident printing customer despite the fact that texas printer solicited the business in alabama and nonresident sent no personnel to texas because nonresident placed additional orders from which it expected to profit sent payments to texas sent and received printing materials to and from texas paid for shipping of printed goods from texas and sent payments to texas the transactions were governed by texas law and substantial part of performance occurred in texas