The defendants responded by entering a special appearance in the Delaware court for the purpose of moving to quash service of process and to vacate the sequestration order, thus contesting Delaware's exercise of jurisdiction over them. They contended that none of them had ever set foot in Delaware or conducted any activities in that state. They contended that the "ex parte" sequestration procedure did not accord them due process of law as required by the Fourteenth Amendment, as construed by Supreme Court cases defining the requirements of personal jurisdiction, and that exercising "quasi in rem" jurisdiction over property in the forum state that was unrelated to the subject-matter of the litigation was constitutionally impermissible.