In this section, I would like to address additional answers to rule Livel’s case. I consider that the court should not follow the decisions of other courts that have overlooked or disregarded the strong presumption against extraterritoriality. In addition, SMUG does not allege any domestic actionable conduct by Lively. SMUG shows to be changing tactics, asserting for the first time in its opposition to Lively’s motion to stay; much of actionable conduct took place in Springfield, Massachusetts”(). Thus, I think that SMUG have to reconsider its own complaint. Nowhere does it claim any actionable demeanor by Lively “in Springfield, Massachusetts,” or anywhere else outside of Uganda, for that stuff. For the reasons of the Motion to Dismiss,