Summary
The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation finding that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Payment Saver, LLC and Casey Graham. The court granted the motion to dismiss in part and transferred the action to the Northern District of Georgia under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
Court
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
Decision date
May 27, 2026
Docket number
4:25-cv-913-JD
Disposition
remanded
Questions Presented
- Whether Defendants were subject to specific or general personal jurisdiction in South Carolina.
- Whether the action should be transferred rather than dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) if personal jurisdiction was lacking.
- What standard of review applied to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation in the absence of specific objections.
Holdings
- The court lacked personal jurisdiction over Graham and Payment Saver because Plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of either specific or general personal jurisdiction in South Carolina.
- When personal jurisdiction is lacking, transfer to an appropriate district rather than dismissal was warranted under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), and the action was transferred to the Northern District of Georgia.
- Because no party filed specific objections, the court was not required to conduct de novo review and instead reviewed the record for clear error.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…