Two $13-$year$-$old boys from North Carolina, Matthew Helms and Julian Brown, had traveled to France to participate in a soccer tournament. The two boys were involved in a bus wreck outside Paris on their way back to the airport and died from injuries suffered in the accident. The parents of the boys believed the accident was due to a defective tire manufactured by a foreign subsidiary of the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company $($Goodyear USA$)$ and sued the parent company and three of its foreign subsidiaries in a state court in North Carolina. Goodyear USA did not challenge personal jurisdiction, but the foreign subsidiaries argued that the North Carolina courts lacked jurisdiction over them and moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied the motion, and the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court$$s decision in favor of Brown, ruling that a small percentage of tires manufactured by the foreign subsidiaries had entered the North Carolina market and that was sufficient minimum contacts. The Goodyear foreign subsidiaries then appealed to the U$.$S$.$ Supreme Court.Why didn$$t the parents of the boys in this case initiate their lawsuit against the foreign subsidiaries of Goodyear USA in a French court?