Be careful of this. This is a very slippery test.The minmum contacts test relates the the individual state's long arm jurisdiction. It also comes into play with the U S District Courts in suits based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction.. Each state seems to have its own criteria for this test. In Connecticut not all of the above examples will satisfy the minimum contacts test, and much will hing on whether you are suing in contract or tort. In Connecticut the case law discloses that what may be sufficient to establish minimum contacts in a tort suit may not be sufficient in a contract action. I have read cases in which fraudulent advertising on the internet or publication of fraudulent adds in a newspaper distributed in Connecticut were sufficient to establish minimum contacts for a tortious fraud suit, but negotiating a contract over an interstate phone call was not enough to create minimum contacts for a contract breach action. In fact I saw the court here in Connecticut dismiss a case on precisely these grounds. There is also the matter of venue. Even if there are sufficient minimum contacts to establish long arm jurisdiction for the court, the case may be dismissed for improper venue. Venue is not a matter of jurisdiction, but rather a convenient forum (court).

It has been my experience that if you initiate the suit in the defendant's state and district of residence, you rarely have a problem with either jurisdiction or venue.