With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Inc., No. C 06-3450 JF (RS), 2006 WL 2374738, at *3 n. 3 (N.D.Cal. Aug. 16, 2006) (“A plaintiff cannot manufacture personal jurisdiction in a trademark case by purchasing the accused product in the forum state.” (citing Millennium Enters., 33 F.Supp.2d at 911)); Jell-E-Bath Inc. v. Crystal Mud Spa, No. 05-1703-KI, 2006 WL 1305113, at *3 n. 1 (D.Or. May 8, 2006) (“Plaintiff cannot manufacture personal jurisdiction.”); McGill Tech. Ltd. v. Gourmet Techs., Inc., 300 F.Supp.2d 501, 506 (E.D.Mich.2004) (disregarding a contact with forum state where contact was likely the product of plaintiffs counsel’s family member and initiated for purposes of litigation) (citing, inter alia, Elecs. For Imaging, Inc. v. Coyle, 340 F.3d 1344, 1350 (Fed.Cir.2003)); Millennium Enters., 33 F.Supp.2d at 911 (<HOLDING>); Sunwest Silver, Inc. v. Int’l Connection,

A: holding that defendants communications sent into tennessee did not constitute purposeful availment because all were in response to communications initiated by the plaintiff
B: holding that the injunction did not constitute a claim
C: holding that the plaintiffs were not covered by the flsa by virtue of the plaintiffs purchase of items at local stores using their employers credit card
D: holding that internet purchase of one compact disc by plaintiffs counsel did not constitute purposeful availment
D.