Alonso v. Maldonado, 2015 WL 7068206, at *2 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 12, 2015) (cleaned up); see also In re Asbestos Litig., 2015 WL 5168121, at *1 (Del. Super. Ct. Sept. 1, 2015) ("When a motion for summary judgment is based on a statute of limitations defense, the Court will grant the motion if upon the record no genuine issues of fact exist as to 'the date on which the applicable statute of limitations began to run, the date to which the statute of limitations may have been tolled, and the date on which the plaintiff filed [his or] her complaint with the court.'"

The fact that Sylebra relegates its "closely-related" argument to a footnote in its brief suggests that it is not serious in its suggestion that the Court, on this record, should ignore or reject a well-established aspect of our forum selection jurisprudence. See In re Asbestos Litig., 2015 WL 5016493, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Aug. 31, 2015) (noting that a party's "relega[tion]" of an argument to a footnote in its brief suggested more of "an attempt to preserve it" than to advance it for serious consideration). * * * * *

Super. Apr. 18, 2012), and TL of Florida, Inc. v. Terex Corp., 54 F. Supp. 3d 320, 327 (D. Del. 2014)); see also TrustCo, 2015 WL 295373, at *9 (expressly rejecting broad interpretation of Saudi Basic in favor of a narrow approach); In re Asbestos Litig., 2015 WL 5168121, at *3 (Del. Super. Sept. 1, 2015) (citing Huffington, TL of Florida, and TrustCo favorably when applying narrow approach); Machala v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms., Inc., 2017 WL 2814728, at *4-5 (Del. Super. June 29, 2017) (same).