Results for “Ministry of Labor and Social Development”

a foreign state and its instrumentalities are presumed immune from this Court’s jurisdiction unless one of the statute’s exceptions applies. Robinson v. Gov’t of Malaysia

such allegations could not overcome the discretionary function exception. SHC offers undisputed evidence that all decisions regarding the distribution of humanitarian relief funds were within the sole discretion of its Chairman Prince Salman and the advisors he selected. (See Al–...

the exercise of personal jurisdiction must comport with due process requirements—there must be minimum contacts and the exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable. Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Robertson–Ceco Corp.

courts distinguish between specific and general jurisdiction. “Specific jurisdiction exists when the forum exercises jurisdiction over the defendant in a suit arising out of the defendant’s contacts with that forum.” Terrorist Attacks I

theorizing that Prince Salman purposefully directed his activities at the United *559 States by contributing to and raising funds for IIRO

they do not support general jurisdiction over him. The 1989 visit to the White House and Maryland is too far removed in time from the 2001 attacks. See

and do not include any specificity regarding dates to put his actions in context. He urges the Court to not rely on his designation as a terrorist by the Treasury Department because he did not have an opportunity to rebut it.

Rule 4(k)(2) may provide a basis for personal jurisdiction. There are several federal claims at issue in this litigation and Plaintiffs have not made a prima facie showing that Mr. Jalaidan is subject to personal jurisdiction in New York or any other state. The Court turns to Mr....

the Court accepts as true the facts alleged in the complaints and draws all reasonable inferences in favor of Plaintiffs. Harris v. City of New York

nor does it allege facts showing that Success Foundation knew the other unnamed organizations to which it transferred money were in the business of supporting terrorism. See Boim II

Plaintiffs rely primarily on their allegations against the “SAAR Foundation and network.” (See Burnett Compl. ¶¶ 261–67; Ashton Compl. ¶¶ 333–39.) The SAAR Foundation

the Court ruled that NCB’s status as a foreign sovereign for purposes of immunity under the FSIA was unclear. It also questioned whether it had personal jurisdiction over NCB. The Court ordered limited jurisdictional discovery on both issues. Terrorist Attacks I

the Court did not consider the supplemental material that the Burnett and Federal Plaintiffs submitted in opposition to Mr. Jalaidan’s motions to dismiss. (See Letter from Sean P. Carter to Court of June 23

AND SHOULD NOT BE DEEMED TO CONSTITUTE AN OFFER TO THE PUBLIC IN

Edwards filed a motion in U.S. District Court in West Palm Beach that alleges well-known criminal defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew