U.S. Code » Title 28 » Part PART IV— JURISDICTION AND VENUE › Chapter CHAPTER 85— DISTRICT COURTS; JURISDICTION

28 U.S.C. § 1330

Actions against foreign states

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction without regard to amount in controversy of any nonjury civil action against a foreign state as defined in section 1603(a) of this title as to any claim for relief in personam with respect to which the foreign state is not entitled to immunity either under sections 1605–1607 of this title or under any applicable international agreement.(b) Personal jurisdiction over a foreign state shall exist as to every claim for relief over which the district courts have jurisdiction under subsection (a) where service has been made under section 1608 of this title.(c) For purposes of subsection (b), an appearance by a foreign state does not confer personal jurisdiction with respect to any claim for relief not arising out of any transaction or occurrence enumerated in sections 1605–1607 of this title.(Added Pub. L. 94–583, § 2(a), Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2891.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 21, 1976, see section 8 of Pub. L. 94–583, set out as a note under section 1602 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,387 cases (251 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33 (1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33 (1989). · cites it 6× “Suits against foreign sovereigns are only possible, respondent asserts, in accordance with the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA), 28 U. S. C. §§ 1330 , 1602-1611, and respondent reads § 1330(a) [1] to prohibit trial by jury of a case against a foreign state.”
Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States, 598 U.S. 264 (2023). · cites it 7× “” 28 U. S. C. § 1330 (a). The FSIA then sets forth a carefully calibrated set of procedures and remedies applicable exclu- sively in civil, not criminal, cases.”
Verlinden B. v. v. Cent. Bank of Nigeria, 461 U.S. 480 (1983). · cites it 6× “Verlinden alleged jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U. S. C. § 1330 . 4 Respondent moved to dismiss for, among other reasons, lack of subject-matter and personal jurisdiction.”
Argentine Repub. v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 U.S. 428 (1989). · cites it 6× “We hold that the District Court correctly dismissed the action, because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA), 28 U. S. C. § 1330 et seq., does not authorize jurisdiction over a foreign state in this situation.”
Gater Assets Ltd. v. AO Moldovagaz, 2 F.4th 42 (2d Cir. 2021). · cites it 7× “The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330 , 1391(f), 1441(d), 1602-11, provides that federal courts lack subject- matter jurisdiction over claims brought against foreign states unless one of the FSIA’s immunity exceptions applies.”
Mobil Cerro Negro, Ltd. v. Bolivarian Repub. of Venezuela, 863 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2017). · cites it 5× “§ 1650a, with the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330 ,1391(f), 1441(d), 1602-1611.”
Rote v. Zel Custom Mfg. LLC, 816 F.3d 383 (6th Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “[ 28 U.S.C. § 1330 (b), FSIA’s long-arm statute].”
Braun v. Islamic Repub. of Iran, 228 F. Supp. 3d 64 (D.D.C. 2017). · cites it 4× “” See 28 U.S.C. § 1330 (a). Here, while the plaintiffs have demanded “trial by jury of all issues legally triable to - a jury,” Compl.”
Gould, Inc., (86-3649), Plaintiff-Respondent, (86-8327) v. Pechiney Ugine Kuhlmann & Trefimetaux, (86-3649), Defendants-Petitioners, (86-8327), 853 F.2d 445 (6th Cir. 1988). · cites it 9× “The motion was predicated upon lack of subject matter and personal jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330 , 1332(a)(2), (4), 1391(f), 1441(d), 1602-1611 (“FSIA”), improper venue, forum non conveniens, and failure to state a claim upon…”
Thuneibat v. Syrian Arab Repub., 167 F. Supp. 3d 22 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 4× “” See 28 U.S.C. § 1330 (a) (italics added). Here, the plaintiffs have not demanded a jury trial, see Civil Cover Sheet at 2, ECF No.”
Samantar v. Yousuf, 560 U.S. 305 (2010). · cites it 4× “The narrow question we must decide is whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA or Act), 28 U. S. C. §§1330 , 1602 et seq., pro vides petitioner with immunity from suit based on actions taken in his official capacity.”
Fritz v. Islamic Repub. of Iran, 320 F. Supp. 3d 48 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 5× “§ 1605A, which both confers subject matter jurisdiction on federal courts to hear certain terrorism-related claims, see 28 U.S.C. § 1330 (a), and recognizes a federal cause of action against those foreign states subject to the exception, see Owens , 864 F.”
Show all 1,387 citing cases →
— 28 U.S.C. § 1330(a) — 3 cases
Foremost-McKesson, Inc. v. Islamic Repub. of Iran, 759 F. Supp. 855 (D.D.C. 1991).
Fritz v. Islamic Repub. of Iran (D.D.C. 2018).
Jerez v. Repub. of Cuba (D.D.C. 2011).
— 28 U.S.C. § 1330(b) — 3 cases
John Doe A-1 to A-49 v. Democratic People's Repub. of Korea (D.D.C. 2019).
Levy v. Repub. of Guinea (D.D.C. 2020).
Saberi v. Gov't of the Islamic Repub. of Iran (D.D.C. 2021).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.