D is a corporation based in Italy, with no American subsidiaries, that manufactures drill presses in Italy and exports them throughout the world. D appoints Distrib, a corporation, to be the exclusive distributor of D's products in North America. Distrib is owned by persons who have no ownership interest in D. Distrib is incorporated in North Carolina, and has its principal place of business in South Carolina. The distributorship agreement between D and Distrib provides that Distrib "shall use its best efforts to sell as many machines made by D in the United States and Canada as is reasonably practicable." Distrib then asks D to approve (as the distribution agreement requires) Distrib's plan to open, at Distrib's expense, a sales office in New Jersey. Distrib points out to D that New Jersey has many potential customers for the type of drill presses made by D, and that these customers will be more likely to buy if Distrib has a local office. D agrees, and Distrib opens the office. From that N.J. office, Distrib sells a drill press made by D to Cust, a machine shop located in New Jersey. P, an employee of Cust, is injured when the drill press pierces the palm of P's hand. P sues D in tort in New Jersey state court, alleging that the absence of a guard on the press made the product dangerously defective. The New Jersey long-arm allows service on "any defendant, wherever based, who makes a product that causes physical injury within this state." P makes service on D as authorized by the statute. D moves for dismissal, asserting that the New Jersey courts cannot constitutionally exercise personal jurisdiction over D in this case. Should the court grant D"s motion?