McMahan Jets, L.L.C. v. X-Air Flight Support, L.L.C., et al

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-60652 Affirmed ] Judge: WED , Judge: JES , Judge: JLD Mandate pull date is 08/30/2012; denying motion to remand case filed by Appellant McMahan Jets, L.L.C. [7153426-2]; denying motion to stay further proceedings in this court filed by Appellant McMahan Jets, L.L.C. [7153426-3] [11-60652]

Case: 11-60652

Document: 00511951378

Page: 1

Date Filed: 08/09/2012

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Fifth Circuit

FILED
No. 11-60652

August 9, 2012
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

MCMAHAN JETS, L.L.C.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ROAD LINK TRANSPORTATION, INCORPORATED;
CLIFFORD GOTTSCHALK,
Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
No. 2:10-CV-175

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*

We have reviewed the briefs, the applicable law, and pertinent portions of
the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that under
*

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.

Case: 11-60652

Document: 00511951378

Page: 2

Date Filed: 08/09/2012

No. 11-60652
the facts alleged by the plaintiff, McMahan Jets, L.L.C. (“McMahan”), this case
is squarely informed by the binding precedent of Growden v. Ed Bowlin &
Assocs., 733 F.2d 1149 (5th Cir. 1984).
The judgment dismissing for lack of minimum contacts is AFFIRMED, and
we need not consider whether McMahan alleged facts sufficient to satisfy the
Mississippi long-arm statute. We also see no error in the denial of McMahan’s
request for jurisdictional discovery or in the denial of McMahan’s motion for
remand.1 McMahan’s most recent motion to remand, filed in this court, is
DENIED. McMahan’s alternative motion to stay proceedings in this court is also
DENIED.

1

This suit was filed in state cojurt and named several defendants not party to this
appeal as well as defendants Road Link Transportation, Incorporated (“Road Link”), and Clifford Gottschalk. The matter was removed to federal court on grounds of diversity of citizenship. After denying McMahan’s motion for remand, the district court dismissed Road Link and
Gottschalk under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) but allowed the remainder of the suit
to proceed. Ordinarily, the refusal to remand is not a final order and cannot be appealed
before final judgment. B., Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co., 663 F. 2d 545, 548 (Former 5th Cir. Dec.
1981). But the application of Rule 54(b) makes the judgment dismissing those two defendants
a final, appealable order. Id.

2