The court's analysis turned on territorial scope. The plaintiff was neither headquartered nor principally located in Massachusetts, any economic injury would be felt elsewhere, and a single phone call to someone temporarily in the state did not establish sufficient nexus. The plaintiff had attempted to anchor the dispute to Massachusetts through incidental contacts and later communications with Massachusetts counsel, but the court rejected that approach, distinguishing between the location of the underlying misconduct and contacts created after the dispute had already surfaced.
Chapter 93A's remedial provisions—enhanced damages and attorneys' fees—make the statute a powerful tool in commercial litigation. This ruling clarifies that defendants can obtain early dismissal on geographic grounds when the core conduct occurred outside Massachusetts, even if scattered in-state contacts exist. Companies cannot manufacture Chapter 93A jurisdiction through minor Massachusetts connections to an otherwise out-of-state business dispute.