Case law

Azima v. Rak Investment Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 7, 2018

First, it concluded that RAKIA had not carried its “heavy burden” of establishing that the United Kingdom constituted an adequate and alternative forum, because: (1) RAKIA was entitled to sovereign immunity in English … its sovereign immunity with regard to Azima’s pending claims, RAKIA has pointed to no case within this district or outside of it that would suggest that RAKIA would not in fact enjoy sovereign immunity within the English

Commissions Import Export S.A. v. Republic of the Congo

916 F. Supp. 2d 48 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 8, 2013

Defendants Expressly Waived Sovereign Immunity Foreign states are “immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States and of the States” except as provided in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act … Commisimpex’s Complaint amounts to an attempt to circumvent the procedures Congress established for the confirmation of New York Convention awards in the FAA.

Sagar v. Lew

211 F. Supp. 3d 262 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2016

Sagar was later replaced by a younger employee who was then forty-seven years old, and whom Sagar says was not qualified for a GS-15 position. Id. ¶ 52. … Sagar’s case qualifies as “mixed” only if he “has been affected by an action which [he] may appeal to the [MSPB].” § 7702(a)(1)(A) (emphasis added); Abou-Hussein v. Mabus, 953 F.

Porzecanski v. Burwell

District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2018

(emphasis added)).4 Yet even though 4 Even if the administrative law judge’s finding was not conclusive on the Court, the record establishes that Porzecanski’s IVIG treatment was “reasonable and necessary,” 42 U.S.C. … The instructions clearly permit Medicare Part B to cover off-label uses of certain drugs, see Medicare Benefits Policy Manual, Chapter 15, § 50.4.2, and the instructions distinguish as separate requirements the definition

Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 25, 2012

These claims clearly involve “personal injury or death” under FSIA § 1605A(a)(1). … Here, the established facts warrant waiver of defendants’ sovereign immunity as provided by the FSIA.

N.Y.C. Apparel F.Z.E. v. United States Customs & Border Protection Bureau

563 F. Supp. 2d 217 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 1, 2008

The Court reasoned that the plaintiff must have secured either a judgment on the merits of its claim or a court-ordered consent decree to qualify as a “prevailing party” based on the Court’s traditional interpretation and … the fee limitation sought by the defendants in Martin , applying § 4 of the OGA to the defendant in this instance “would upset the reasonable expectations of the parties,” id. at 360, 119 S.Ct. 1998 , and would therefore clearly

Cape Cod Charter Boat Association v. Burgum

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 14, 2025

Chief among those problems is Plaintiffs’ failure to establish Article III standing to bring their claims. State sovereign immunity also frustrates some claims. … Plaintiffs have not “clearly allege[d] facts demonstrating” that the relief they seek would likely change anything for their members.

Ho-Chunk, Inc. v. Sessions

253 F. Supp. 3d 303 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 24, 2017

(“HCI”) is a wholly tribal-owned entity established by the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska under its tribal law, and “acts as the [tribe’s] economic development arm.” Compl. ¶ 9. … But “sovereign immunity” is a term of art, and in this context it is clearly a reference to tribes’ general immunity from suit, see Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Mfg.

Roberts v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 24, 2022

Barker attested that "signs of EFP damage" were "clearly visible" in photos submitted by Du Plessis showing the vehicle damage. Barker Aff. ,r 49. … Since the Court has already established its subject matter jurisdiction over the qualifying plaintiffs' claims, see supra Section III.A, the Court concludes that Iran is liable to the Contractor Plaintiffs and the Mughal

BPA International, Inc. v. Kingdom of Sweden

281 F. Supp. 2d 73 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 5, 2003

Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act Under FSIA, a foreign state and its instrumentalities are “presumptively immune from the jurisdiction of United States courts.” Saudi Arabia v. … Before those amendments, FSIA clearly required a nexus between a plaintiffs claims and the United States, comparable to minimum contacts. Id. at 89 .

Singh v. South Asian Society of George Washington Univ.

572 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 5, 2008

[T]he decision about where to post security guards — regardless of whether that decision was negligent — is clearly the type of discretionary function that Congress has exempted from the FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity … immunity.”)

Ihebereme v. Capital One, N.a

300 F.R.D. 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 12, 2013

Second, the Court held that defendants had a qualified immunity because when they sent the letters to plaintiffs stating that the loan was delinquent, they reasonably believed the truth of those statements. Id. … Moreover, the letter does not demonstrate, nor do plaintiffs argue, that the Court’s finding of a qualified immunity is legally erroneous.

Elk Associates Funding Corporation v. United States Small Business Administration

858 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 24, 2012

To qualify, an institutional investor must have a net worth of at least $1 million. See id. § 107.50. … Accordingly, the Court finds that ELK has failed to establish that it is likely to succeed on the merits of this claim.

Webuild S.P.A. v. Argentine Republic

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 4, 2025

Because “[a] final judgment of one state—or, for that matter, from [the] ICSID . . . qualifies for recognition throughout the land[,] . . . the language of [the Investment Disputes Act] appears to envision no role for this … And, the record plainly establishes that the award is authentic. See Compl., Exhibit (“Ex.”) A (Impregilo S.p.A. v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No.

Croesus EMTR Master Fund L.P. v. Federative Republic of Brazil

212 F. Supp. 2d 30 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 2002

finding that an exception to immunity applies under 28 U.S.C. § 1605 (a)(2). … Moreover, Phoenix Consulting, 216 F.3d at 40 , and In re Papandreou, 139 F.3d at 254-55 , clearly permit courts to consider forum non conve-niens as a basis for dismissal where the FSIA applies.

Brandon Mill Manager, LLC v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 23, 2021

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that such jurisdiction exists. See Khadr v. United States, 529 F.3d 1112, 1115 (D.C. Cir. 2008). … waived immunity for every type of tort.”

In Re DISASTER AT RIYADH AIRPORT, SAUDI ARABIA, ON AUGUST 19, 1980

540 F. Supp. 1141 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 20, 1982

As a prerequisite, the court must establish whether an adequate alternative forum exists which possesses jurisdiction over the whole case. … Because the court has not resolved the complicated issue of SAA’s immunity from suit in this case, 24 the court cannot definitively state that this immunity problem favors trial in one forum as opposed to another; instead

Glover v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 16, 2015

In addition, defendants Eckert and Nickerson moved for summary judgment on Counts I and III, contending that they were entitled to qualified immunity and that they were not the officers who actually arrested plaintiff. … In addition, plaintiff’s claim that “Counts I and III against Defendants Nickerson and Eckert are not barred by the doctrine of qualified immunity,” Pl.’s 2d Opp. ¶ 12, is a legal conclusion that is not supported by any citation

McFadden v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 2, 2016

To establish the third element of his prima facie case, the plaintiff must demonstrate that he is a qualified individual, which under the Rehabilitation Act, is “an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable … “[T]he burden of establishing immunity [is] on the official.” Id. (citing Westfall, 484 U.S. at 299).

Payne v. District of Columbia

859 F. Supp. 2d 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 14, 2012

Legislative immunity shields these communications. … Gandhi establishes that he had one-on-one conversations with Gray but cannot remember what was said. (Pl.’s Consolidated Opp’n at 15.)