In Cassiar Mining Corp. v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal. App. 4th 550, the defendant was incorporated in Canada and mined and milled raw asbestos in British Columbia. It sold raw asbestos fibers to manufacturers, including several different companies with California plants. For 38 years, the defendant sold thousands of tons of raw asbestos to California operations. Ultimately, workers with progressive lung diseases, who alleged asbestos fiber exposure had caused their ailments, sued the defendant in California. Despite the fact the defendant had sold thousands of tons of its product to several California companies over a period of 38 years, there was no general jurisdiction. The Court stated in Cassiar, supra, 66 Cal. App. 4th at p. 555, the defendant's "contacts with California did not appear to be so continuous and systematic as to establish California's general jurisdiction over any cause of action against the defendant, regardless of its relationship with the forum. A Canadian company headquartered in Vancouver, the defendant had no offices, employees, bank accounts, or real property within the state. It did not advertise in any California trade journals or publications." In Cassiar, the sale of thousands of tons of asbestos to several California plants over a period of 38 years did not constitute the substantial, continuous and systematic contacts necessary to establish general jurisdiction, and here, the sale of 20-some pasta-making machines over seven years to someone who just happens to have an office in California does not give rise to general jurisdiction either. The Court held there was no general jurisdiction over the Canadian corporation that sold thousands of tons of raw asbestos to California operations over a period of 38 years. However, the Court held there was specific jurisdiction. It was clear from the long history of direct sales to California plants that the Canadian corporation intended to serve the California market. (Cassiar, supra, 66 Cal. App. 4th at p. 556.)