Opinion ID: 4470910
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: We review dismissals for lack of personal jurisdiction de novo. See Old Republic Ins. Co. v. Cont’l Motors, Inc., 877 F.3d 895, 903 (10th Cir. 2017). Dental Dynamics, as the plaintiff below, bears the burden of establishing personal jurisdiction. See id. Where, as here, a complaint is dismissed at the preliminary motion to dismiss stage based only upon the complaint and accompanying affidavits, Dental Dynamics need only make a prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction. See Dudnikov v. Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts, Inc., 514 F.3d 1063, 1069 (10th Cir. 2008). Dental Dynamics must make this showing with respect to each of the claims alleged. See 4A Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Adam N. Steinman, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1069.7 (4th ed. 2015) (“[I]t is important to remember that a plaintiff also must secure personal jurisdiction over a defendant with respect to each claim she asserts.”). Dental Dynamics may make this showing through affidavits or other written materials. See AST Sports Sci., -6- Inc. v. CLF Distrib. Ltd., 514 F.3d 1054, 1057 (10th Cir. 2008). At this stage, all factual disputes are resolved in Dental Dynamics’s favor. See Old Republic, 877 F.3d at 903. Conclusory allegations, however, need not be credited by this court and “will not suffice to defeat a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) motion.” Dudnikov, 514 F.3d at 1073.