Ohio oil well producers that then sold oil to Pennsylvania refineries). Thus, it is not persuasive that title to the hoses passed in Europe, rather than in Texas. See Renner v. Lanard, Toys Ltd., 33 F.3d 277, 282 (3d Cir.1994) (noting that “a foreign manufacturer or seller [which] rids itself of title by a sale F.O.B. a foreign port [does not] insulate [itself] from jurisdiction if there is the other type of activity” indicating purposeful availment); Gulf Consol. Servs., Inc. v. Corinth Pipeworks, S.A., 898 F.2d 1071, 1073 (5th Cir.1990) (observing that “the simple fact that a sales transaction is consummated outside that jurisdiction does not prevent the sale from forming the basis of jurisdiction”); Benitez-Allende v. Alcan Aluminio Do Brasil, S.A., 857 F.2d 26, 30 (1st Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); Charles W. “Rocky” Rhodes, The Predictability
holding that reasonableness analysis applies in general jurisdiction case under federal circuit law holding that since the court already determined that it had general jurisdiction over a defendant it was unnecessary to engage in the specific jurisdiction analysis recognizing the same analysis applies under the wlad and title vii holding that title passing in brazil is beside the point in a specific jurisdiction analysis holding title vii analysis applies in ada case