The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant’s forum non conveniens motion, but did err in dismissing the action rather than merely staying it.  The suit was by residents of China against a California resident regarding alleged misuse of funds donated to the defendant’s charitable foundation for his personal benefit.  China was an available forum.  It was enough that Wang agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of Chinese courts in his sworn declaration, and that he and his attorney also swore his wife would do so as well.  There was substantial evidence that there was no procedural bar to bringing the action as the major plaintiff donors to defendant’s foundation had already sued there.  To the extent the statute of limitations was in issue, it was not clear that it would bar suit in China.  However, because defendants did not agree to waive the statute of limitations as a defense to suit in China, the trial court should have stayed rather than dismissed the case to assure that the plaintiffs could return to California to sue if “their action in China is rejected for any reason.”