By Craig Clough

Law360 (June 24, 2020, 7:47 PM EDT) -- A former Marine urged a Minnesota federal judge Wednesday to toss a suit brought by 3M alleging he attempted a multibillion-dollar scam involving the purchase of N95 respirators and fake ties to Bill Gates, arguing the court has no jurisdiction over him because of his slim Minnesota connections.

The business dealings Matthew Starsiak and his company AMK Energy Services LLC had with 3M over an attempted N95 deal were "ultimately fruitless," and since he conducted no business transactions with Minnesota-based 3M, the suit should be dismissed, Starsiak said.

"No contracts were finalized and no purchases were ever consummated," Starsiak said. "In fact, neither Starsiak nor AMK have ever sold a single 3M respirator in the commercial arena, nor have they used 3M's 'famous trademarks' in connection with the single alleged sales effort."

"Regardless of whether there is any substantive merit to 3M's claims, the complaint raises a threshold issue of personal jurisdiction," he added.

A supplier of N95 masks, 3M accused Matthew Starsiak and his company earlier this month of approaching it with an offer to buy 900 billion respirators on behalf of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Elon Musk and Richard Branson to be donated to African populations, even though "virtually nothing" he told 3M turned out to be true.

"The complaint fully addresses jurisdiction with the conduct directed at 3M employees in Minnesota," William Childs, 3M's senior counsel, told Law360. "Defendants have offered no meaningful response to the allegations in the complaint; namely, that defendants damaged 3M's good name by stealing 3M's trademarks and hijacking the names of its lawyers in Minnesota,"

According to the lawsuit, after being rejected by 3M, Starsiak quickly turned around and used the names of 3M's top lawyers, which he learned through the interaction, to bolster his credentials with other companies as a 3M distributor in an effort to perpetrate scams.

The company was scathing in its description of Starsiak, calling him "a con man who trades on his military service to deceive others so he can take their money," while suggesting his company is a total sham.

3M said that in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it has invested in an effort to double its annual production of 1.1 billion N95 respirators, but has not raised its prices. The company noted in the lawsuit the cost of 900 billion masks would be $1.143 trillion, which is "more than thirty-six times 3M's total annual revenues" and would also "represent hundreds of years of 3M's N95 respirator production."

Starsiak boasted on phone calls with 3M executives about his extensive and high-level military experience, 3M said, alleging that he claimed among other things to have ran the "air war" in Iraq and Afghanistan for the Marine Corps. Starsiak's company also falsely claims a tony Manhattan address on its website when it is based out of a single-family home in Utah, falsely claims to be represented by the international law firm Dentons, and fraudulently claims to have thousands of employees and dozens of locations around the world, 3M said in the lawsuit.

The suit also claims that while Starsiak was attempting to purchase the respirators from 3M, he was also "secretly" trying to find buyers to purchase N95 respirators at between $3.85 and $4.50 each.

"To put that in perspective, if Mr. Starsiak had been able to find purchasers at that price for all the 900 billion respirators that he claimed to be purchasing for charity, his under-the-table net on those respirators would be between $2.322 and $2.907 trillion," 3M said.

Starsiak said in his motion to dismiss that although 3M "cavalierly asserts" he is a con man, he is "a disabled military veteran with an exemplary record who operates his business, AMK, seeking to provide employment opportunities to other veterans."

Starsiak also said that neither he nor "AMK's officers or employees are registered to conduct business in Minnesota, own or maintain any offices, bank accounts, or real property in Minnesota, advertise or solicit business in Minnesota, have agents in Minnesota, or otherwise avail themselves of any of the benefits or protections of Minnesota's laws. In fact, Starsiak has never been to Minnesota for any purpose."

In the motion, Starsiak said he and his company did have several communications with 3M officials, but cited among other cases the 2015 Eighth Circuit ruling in Eagle Technology v. Expander Americas Inc . to argue it did not constitute jurisdiction over his actions. The Eagle case established that phone calls, written communication and wire transfers to and from a state "do not create sufficient contacts to comport with due process such that a foreign corporation could 'reasonably anticipate being haled into court there,'" Starsiak said.

3M's lawsuit is seeking, among other things, an injunction preventing the defendants from claiming ties to the company, and for the defendants to disgorge and pay to 3M all profits derived from the sale of goods under 3M's marks, which the company said it would donate to a COVID-19 charity. At the time it filed the lawsuit, 3M said it had filed at least 10 others in state and federal courts in its fight against fraud, price-gouging and counterfeiting related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

"The allegations in the complaint are clear: Defendants lied again and again and again," Childs said. "They lied about having connections to the Gates Foundation, they lied about having a headquarters in New York City, and they lied to gain entry to 3M and steal the identities of 3M lawyers to try and steal money from well-meaning buyers. There's no excuse for this conduct and the motion to dismiss – which ignores all of defendants' misconduct directed at 3M itself – offers none."

Starsiak did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

3M is represented Peter W. Baldwin of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP.

Starsiak is represented by Robert W. Vaccaro and Timothy R. Schupp of Meagher & Geer PLLP.

The case is 3M Co. v. Matthew Starsiak et al., case number 0:20-cv-01314, in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

--Editing by Breda Lund.

Update: This story has been updated to include comment from 3M. 

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.