Plaintiff brings an action against Defendant in a state court of general jurisdiction in Arizona. P is a Citizen of Arizona. D is a citizen of New York. P alleges that D has infringed upon a patent recently granted to P by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. P seeks $75,000 in damages and an injunction barring D from further acts of infringement. Patent infringement matters are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts. D is personally served with a copy of the summons and complaint when his airplane lands at Los Angeles International Airport on a brief stopover. The flight was bound for Hawaii. D fails to answer the complaint and P obtains a default judgment. P then seeks to enforce the judgment in a New York state court. Which of the following statements is correct? Question 7Select one: a. The Court in Arizona did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the action, so P's judgment is not entitled to Full Faith and Credit from a New York court. b. Even assuming the traditional rule that service of process within a state is a valid means of obtaining personal jurisdiction over a defendant, the Arizona state court never obtained personal jurisdiction over D since he does not reside in Arizona (and so the judgment is not entitled to Full Faith and Credit from a New York court). c. By failing to appear, D waived his right to object to subject matter and personal jurisdiction. d. The court of Arizona was the improper venue