ARORA v. BUCKHEAD FAMILY DENTISTRY, INC., 1:16-cv-01806

Background

Plaintiff Sanjay Arora, a dentist by profession, alleges that while living in Atlanta he received a permanent dental crown in February 2014 that was composed primarily of nickel, causing gum irritation and ongoing pain; the crown was manufactured by Global Dental Solutions and installed by Dr. Travis Paige of Buckhead Family Dentistry.
Arora moved to the D.C. area in August 2014 and filed this diversity suit in the District of Columbia in September 2016 against Buckhead, Paige, Global, Global’s president Brad Abramson, and his insurer Cigna, asserting claims including fraud, negligent misrepresentation, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy.
Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (Global, Abramson, Buckhead, Paige) and for insufficient service / failure to state a claim (Cigna). Arora, proceeding pro se, sought an extension to effect service and leave to amend his complaint.
The court found Arora’s alleged original tortious injury occurred in Georgia (where the crown was installed) and that continuing pain in D.C. does not constitute a separate tortious injury for D.C.’s long-arm statute, so personal jurisdiction over the out-of-state defendants was lacking under D.C. Code § 13‑423(a)(4).
Arora’s service on Cigna was defective: attempted service on CT Corporation failed because CT Corp. was not shown to be Cigna Health & Life Insurance Co.’s registered agent, and certified-mail service to Cigna’s Hartford and Philadelphia offices on December 23, 2016, was not shown to have been delivered to an authorized agent under Rule 4(h).
The court granted Arora a discretionary 45‑day extension to effect proper service on Cigna, denied leave to file a second amended complaint without prejudice (futile as to jurisdictional defects and premature as to claims against Cigna), and denied the request to amend the civil cover sheet as unnecessary. The court ordered the parties to show cause whether transfer to the Northern District of Georgia is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1406(a) or 1631.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether D.C. courts have personal jurisdiction under the D.C. long-arm statute over Global/Abramson/Buckhead/Paige for injuries from out-of-state dental work	Arora asserts jurisdiction because he resides in D.C. and continued to experience pain there; Buckhead sent marketing emails into D.C.	Defendants argue the original tortious act and injury occurred in Georgia and they lack sufficient contacts with D.C.	Dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction over Global, Abramson, Buckhead, and Paige — continuing pain in D.C. is a secondary injury and not a tortious injury for § 13‑423(a)(4)
Whether service on Cigna was effective	Arora contends he attempted multiple mailings (to CT Corp., then to Hartford and Philadelphia) and requests more time; asserts good faith efforts	Cigna contends CT Corp. is not Cigna Health & Life’s agent and certified-mail to corporate/legal offices did not show delivery to an authorized agent	Court: service on CT Corp. ineffective; December 23 mailings not shown to have reached an authorized agent — plaintiff given 45 days to effect proper service
Whether the complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim against Cigna (Rule 12(b)(6))	Arora seeks to proceed on claims against Cigna	Cigna moves to dismiss on the merits if service is proper	Court declined to reach merits because personal jurisdiction / service unresolved; Rule 12(b)(6) not addressed
Whether leave to amend should be granted	Arora seeks to file a second amended complaint to cure defects	Defendants oppose; argue amendments would be futile or premature	Leave denied without prejudice — amendment futile as to D.C. jurisdictional defects and premature regarding Cigna until service/jurisdiction resolved

Key Cases Cited

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard for motions to dismiss)
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (pro se complaints construed liberally)
James Madison Ltd. v. Ludwig, 82 F.3d 1085 (amendment futile if proposed claim would not survive a motion to dismiss)
GTE New Media Servs. Inc. v. BellSouth Corp., 199 F.3d 1343 (plaintiff bears burden to make prima facie showing of jurisdictional facts)
Leaks v. Ex-Lax, Inc., 424 F. Supp. 413 (continuing pain after out-of-forum injury does not create jurisdiction in forum)
Etchebarne-Bourdin v. Radice, 754 A.2d 322 (D.C. Ct. App.) (distinguishing original injury from secondary injuries for long-arm jurisdiction)
Mann v. Castiel, 681 F.3d 368 (Rule 4(m) good-cause and extension principles)
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (courts must address jurisdiction before reaching merits)
Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. United States, 780 F.2d 74 (mandatory transfer under § 1631 when lack of jurisdiction and transfer in interest of justice)
Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574 (personal jurisdiction and necessity of effective service of process)