ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING TIME FOR JURISDICTIONAL DISCOVERY

BARBARA JOCOBS ROTHSTEIN, United States District Judge

This case is a diversity action for trade secret misappropriation, breach of contract, and unfair competition. Before the court is Defendants' motion under FRCP 12(b)(2) to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. To overcome a challenge to the personal jurisdiction of a court where the court receives only written submissions to establish jurisdiction, a plaintiff must present "a prima facie showing of jurisdictional facts," which is accomplished by "demonstrat[ing] facts that if true would support jurisdiction." Ballard v. Savage, 65 F.3d 1495, 1498 (9th Cir. 1995); accord Data Disc, Inc. v. Systems Tech. Assocs., Inc., 557 F.2d 1280. 1285 (9th Cir. 1977).

Plaintiff has requested that the court allow it limited time to discover such jurisdictional facts. Defendants oppose that request on fears that such discovery will turn into a fishing expedition. Those fears are unfounded as long as the discovery is narrowly tailored. Where, as here, Plaintiff believes there are facts to establish personal jurisdiction, it is appropriate to allow limited discovery. Data Disc, 557 F.2d at 1285 n. 1 ("Discovery may appropriately be granted where pertinent facts bearing on the question of jurisdiction are controverted or where a more satisfactory showing of the facts is necessary.").

Accordingly, the court grants Plaintiff 30 days in which to conduct discovery limited to the sole purpose of establishing jurisdictional facts. Such discovery shall be expedited by counsel working cooperatively. At the end of the 30 days, Defendant can renew its motion to dismiss.