Mohamed Lasheen v. Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt

Good Law
485 F. App'x 203
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 2, 201210-17034California1,413 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

The Arab Republic of Egypt, the Embassy of the Arab Republic of Egypt, and the Embassy of Egypt Cultural and Educational Bureau (collectively, the “Egyptian defendants”) appeal the district court’s determination that they are not immune from suit by Mohamed E. Lash-een (“Lasheen”). Lasheen sued the Egyptian defendants for violations of the Employees Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) and breach of contract. The Egyptian defendants asserted sovereign immunity. Because Lasheen’s claims are based upon the Egyptian defendants’ commercial activity, we affirm. As the parties are familiar with the factual and legal history of the case, we need not recount it here.

I

Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), “a foreign state shall be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States and of the States except as provided in” the Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1604 . Thus, “a foreign state is presumptively immune from the jurisdiction of United States courts[,] unless a specified exception applies.” Lasheen I, 603 F.3d at 1169-70 (quoting Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, 507 U.S. 349, 355 , 113 S.Ct. 1471 , 123 L.Ed.2d 47 (1993)). “Once the plaintiff offers…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.