International Litigation

[...]the court held that because plaintiffs claimed expropriation in violation of international law, they must either exhaust or convincingly demonstrate the inadequacy of Hungarian remedies.7 In Leibovitch v. Islamic Republic of Iran, the Seventh Circuit held that the terrorism ex- ception to immunity in § 1605A applied to emotional distress claims brought against the Republic of Iran by the foreign national family members of a U.S. citizen injured during a terrorist attack allegedly carried out with the support of Iran.8 The court reasoned that even though the federal cause of action created by the 2008 revisions of the terrorist exception showed Congress' intent to establish a narrow private right of action mainly for U.S. claimants, the broad jurisdictional exception remained for cases involving U.S. victims.9 In Seijas v. Republic of Argentina, the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of plaintiffs' claim that Banco de la Nación Argentina (BNA) was an alter ego of Argentina and there- fore liable for Argentina's debt, as well as denial of jurisdictional discovery on that ques- tion.10 The court rejected as insufficient plain tiffs' proffered basis for an alter ego relationship, including the fact that Argentina could appoint and remove BNA's directors and that BNA made loans in Argentina's political interest.11 In EM Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina, the Second Circuit ordered post-judgment asset discovery of third parties concerning property of Argentina located outside the United States.12 The Second Circuit rejected Seventh Circuit precedent that such discovery re- quires a plaintiff to identify specific non-immune assets subject to attachment.13 Instead, the court reasoned that asset discovery does not implicate immunity because it involves producing information and not the attachment of sovereign property and because it was directed at third parties and not at Argentina itself.14 In ongoing litigation, the Second Circuit in NML Capital, Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina affirmed in part and remanded in part a district court injunction enjoining Argentina from making payments on performing bonds without making payments on defaulted bonds.15 Π. International Service of Process Rule 4(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs international service of pro- cess.16 In Lozano v. Bosdet, the Fifth Circuit dealt with the period within which an interna- tional defendant must be served process after a complaint is filed.17 The Court took note of the flex