David, an Alabama resident, files suit in an Alabama court against QuickAds, an internet company based in Georgia that provides advertising services. QuickAds only contact with persons in Alabama has been through QuickAds passive advertising. The Alabama court is

A. likely to have jurisdiction if the claim David brings is based on QuickAds advertising scheme in Alabama.
B. not likely to have jurisdiction over the case because QuickAds is based in Georgia.
C. likely to refer the case to a higher district court.
D. likely to refer the case to an appellate court.
E. The B answer is wrong please help me to find another answer

US laws do not recognize the legal existence of foreign or out of state companies, a company only exists in the state at which it was chartered. Although the internet has complicated things, since boundaries have faded, but some conditions must be met before a state court can serve a foreign company.

For a foreign company to be served by a state court, it must carry on “continuous and systematic” affiliations with residents of the state which makes them “essentially at home”. The company's operations must be substantial enough to make the company at home, i.e. it must carry a significant amount of business within the states boundaries.

Apparently this is not the case with QuickAds, so Alabama state courts will not have jurisdiction over it.