With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in person-am, if he be not present within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Id. (quotations omitted). 19 . Ch. 16, § 1, SLA 1960. 20 . Ch. 87, § 1, SLA 1968. 21 . The intended reach of the long-arm statute is as broad as is permitted under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Alaska Telecom, Inc. v. Schafer, 888 P.2d 1296, 1299 (Alaska 1995). 22 . AS 09.05.015(a). 23 . This language was originally in Civil Rule 4(e)(2). Alaska Supreme Court Order No. 49 (January 1, 1963). In 1979 the language was moved to Civil Rule 4(d)(12), where it still resides. Alaska Suprem al.App.2004) (<HOLDING>). 39 . An illustrative case is Filet Menu, Inc.

A: holding that californias tolling statute could not constitutionally be applied to a nonresident entering into a sales transaction with a resident since the nonresident was engaged in interstate commerce
B: holding that a missouri tolling statute was unconstitutional under the commerce clause in the situation where a resident defendant moved out of state
C: holding that the ohio tolling statute could not be constitutionally applied to a person who had moved out of ohio to take a job in pennsylvania since intersiate commerce is affected when persons move between states in the course of or in search for employment
D: holding that because dr medeiros a former california resident moved to texas to take a new job in 1998 thereby engaging in interstate commerce the tolling statute could not be applied under bendix
D.