A plaintiff brought an action based an negligence in federal district court in State A under diversity jurisdiction to recover for injuries allegedly sustained in an accident that occurred while he was a passenger on board a cruise ship in a port in State B. The defendant in the action was a State C corporation that owned the cruise ship. At the time of the alleged negligence, the ship was docked in the State B port after finishing a voyage from a port in State A. For several years prior to the voyage on which the plaintiff was injured, the cruise ship had brought passengers to visit three ports in State A and had most recently spent several weeks in repair at a shipyard in State A. The State A long-arm statute authorizes personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant if the defendant "does business" in State A. The phrase "does business" has been interpreted by the highest court of State A to reach as far as is constitutionally permissible. If the defendant timely moves to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction, how is the district court likely to rule?