For specific jurisdiction is sufficient if the plaintiff’s claim “arises from or is related to” the defendant’s contacts with the forum state.  Arises from describes a causal relationship between the defendants contacts and the claim.  But relates to does not require causation.  Here, Ford had substantial contacts with Montana and Minnesota, selling cars of the same type as those involved in the accidents that gave rise to these suits.  The accidents occurred in Montana and Minnesota to residents of those states, so they weren’t forum-shopping by suing in those states.  And though the plaintiffs had bought the cars in other states, their claims nevertheless related to Ford’s contacts with Montana and Minnesota, since the claims related to the same products Ford tried to sell in those states.  It sales efforts and availability of a dealer network to service those cars might well have influenced the plaintiffs to buy the cars even if they did so from an out-of-state seller.