Which Rule 12(b) basis corresponds to lack of jurisdiction over the person?

Which Rule 12(b) basis corresponds to lack of jurisdiction over the person?

• A. Rule 12(b)(3) Improper Venue or Division
• B. Rule 12(b)(2) Lack of Jurisdiction Over the Person
• C. Rule 12(b)(5) Insufficiency of Service of Process
• D. Rule 12(b)(4) Insufficiency of Process

Answer: (B)

Personal jurisdiction is the court’s power to bind a defendant to its judgments. When a party argues the court does not have that power, the appropriate defense is a Rule 12(b)(2) motion for lack of personal jurisdiction. If the court lacks this power, the case must be dismissed because the court cannot authorize proceedings against that defendant. This is distinct from improper venue (where the case is brought in the wrong location), or issues with service or process (which concern whether the defendant was properly notified and the papers were properly served). Those topics address different procedural concerns, not the court’s authority over the person. For example, even if service was imperfect or the venue is questionable, the court could still have personal jurisdiction; or the case could be dismissed for those other reasons, but not because the court lacks power to exercise jurisdiction over the defendant.

Personal jurisdiction is the court’s power to bind a defendant to its judgments. When a party argues the court does not have that power, the appropriate defense is a Rule 12(b)(2) motion for lack of personal jurisdiction. If the court lacks this power, the case must be dismissed because the court cannot authorize proceedings against that defendant.

This is distinct from improper venue (where the case is brought in the wrong location), or issues with service or process (which concern whether the defendant was properly notified and the papers were properly served). Those topics address different procedural concerns, not the court’s authority over the person. For example, even if service was imperfect or the venue is questionable, the court could still have personal jurisdiction; or the case could be dismissed for those other reasons, but not because the court lacks power to exercise jurisdiction over the defendant.