Sabre International Security v. Torres Advanced Enterprise Solutions, LLC, 60 F. Supp. 3d 21

Sabre International Security (Iraq) sued Torres Advanced Enterprise Solutions, LLC and individual officers (Jerry Torres, Scott Torres, Kathryn Jones, Rebekah Dyer) for breach of contract, tortious interference, and conversion related to the TWISS MATOC teaming agreement.
Sabre alleges the Individual Defendants secretly terminated the Teaming Agreement and competed directly, reducing Sabre prices, underpaying invoices, and usurping Sabre's scope of work.
Torres is Virginia-based; Sabre is Iraqi-based; TWISS MATOCs involved U.S. Government security work in Iraq from 2007–2010 under a Teaming Agreement with Torres as prime and Sabre as subcontractor.
The Court granted prior motions to dismiss Counts 15–17 and 20–22 but not Count 18; Sabre seeks personal jurisdiction over the Individual Defendants via minimum contacts and the Teaming Agreement’s forum clause.
Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; Sabre opposed, citing (1) defendant-level contacts and (2) forum selection clause; the court considers both routes.
The court ultimately denied the motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, holding the Individual Defendants are subject to the forum selection clause and thereby consent to jurisdiction in the District of Columbia.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court has general or specific jurisdiction over the Individual Defendants under minimum contacts	Sabre contends Torres' DC contacts can be imputed to individuals	Defendants argue no sufficient minimum contacts exist for individuals	No jurisdiction under minimum contacts over the Individual Defendants
Whether the Individual Defendants are bound by the Teaming Agreement's forum selection clause	Clause should bind individuals as closely related participants	Clause binds only parties to the contract; nonparties cannot be bound	Individual Defendants are bound by the forum selection clause and consent to DC jurisdiction

Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014) (general jurisdiction requires essentially at-home status)
Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783 (1984) (employee contacts not automatically tied to employer contacts)
Marra v. Papandreou, 59 F. Supp. 2d 65 (1999) (closely related forum-selection binding non-parties (D.D.C.))
Holland Am. Line Inc. v. Wartsila N. Am., Inc., 485 F.3d 450 (9th Cir. 2007) (forum-selection clause can bind nonparties in appropriate circumstances)
Lipcon v. Underwriters at Lloyd's London, 148 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. 1998) (forum-selection clauses extend to closely related nonparties)
Shaheen v. Smith, 2013 WL 5995619 (D.D.C. 2013) (forum selection clause distinctions in nonparty contexts)