Opinion ID: 696239
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Structure and Language of the Act

Text: 7 The FSIA, codified at 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1330(a), 2 provides the sole basis for federal jurisdiction over the Export Group's claims against INMECAFE. Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 U.S. 428, 433-35 & n. 3, 109 S.Ct. 683, 687-89 & n. 3, 102 L.Ed.2d 818 (1989); Verlinden B.V. v. Central Bank of Nigeria, 461 U.S. 480, 489, 493, 103 S.Ct. 1962, 1971, 76 L.Ed.2d 81 (1983). The FSIA creates a statutory presumption that a foreign state and its instrumentalities are immune from suit unless one of the specific exceptions enumerated in sections 1605 through 1607 of the Act applies. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1604. The Export Group claims that subject matter jurisdiction over their claim of interference with contract rights is conferred by the commercial activity exception to foreign sovereign immunity codified at 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1605(a)(2). Section 1605(a) provides in relevant part:A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States or of the States in any case-- 8 (2) in which the action is based 9 [i] upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state; or 10 [ii] upon an act performed in the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere; or 11 [iii] upon an act outside the territory of the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere and that act causes a direct effect in the United States    12 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1605(a)(2) (emphasis added). Elsewhere, the FSIA defines commercial activity as follows: 13 A commercial activity means either a regular course of commercial conduct or a particular commercial transaction or act. The commercial character of an activity shall be determined by reference to the nature of the course of conduct or particular transaction or act, rather than by reference to its purpose. 14 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1603(d). The fifth exception to the general grant of sovereign immunity in section 1605 reads: 15 A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States or of the States in any case-- ... 16 (5) not otherwise encompassed in paragraph (2) above, in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee of that foreign state while acting within the scope of his office or employment; except this paragraph shall not apply to-- ... 17 (B) any claim arising out of malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights. 18 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1605(a) (emphases added). 19 In granting INMECAFE's motion to set aside the default judgment, the district court ruled that the exceptions to the waiver of sovereign immunity contained in section 1605(a)(5)(B) are not limited to the noncommercial torts exception of that paragraph, but extend to restore sovereign immunity for any such tort claims, even if committed in the course of a commercial activity as defined in section 1605(a)(2). Thus, even though INMECAFE's acts that form the basis of the Export Group's complaint were commercial activities under section 1605(a)(2), the court ruled that they were entitled to sovereign immunity under section 1605(a)(5)(B). 20