With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". this Court’s prior case in Gill-rie in that the non-resident defendant’s conduct was purposefully directed at Texas. Specifically, Wilkerson’s posting of allegedly defamatory statements regarding a Houston business on local websites that review Houston, Texas businesses was purposely directed at visitors to those targeted local websites, including consumers seeking information regarding the provision of financial services by Houston businesses. Wilkerson’s posts referred to a Texas compan h Texas by posting his allegedly defamatory and libelous statements online on local.yahoo.com’s Houston website and yelp.com’s Houston website is sufficient to support the trial court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over him. See Moki Mac River Expeditions v. Drugg, 221 S.W.3d 569, 577 (Tex.2007) (<HOLDING>); Tempest Broad. Corp. v. Imlay, 150 S.W.3d

A: holding that minimum contacts exist if the defendant has purposefully directed his activities at residents of the forum and the litigation results from alleged injuries that arise out of or relate to those activities
B: holding that when determining whether a nonresident defendant has continuous and systematic contacts with texas sufficient to support general jurisdiction courts examine the defendants contacts and forumrelated activities only up to the time that suit was filed
C: holding that sufficient minimum contacts exist when nonresident defendant purposefully directed action toward texas
D: holding that when nonresident defendant has purposefully established minimum contacts texas courts exercise of personal jurisdiction will not comport with fair play and substantial justice only in rare cases
C.