Opinion ID: 697265
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Unpaid and overpaid wages

Text: 37 The district court dismissed both Grappo's claim for unpaid wages and Alitalia's counterclaim for overpayment of wages on the ground that they were pendent claims. Grappo does not appeal the dismissal of his claim, and consequently, it is not before us. 38 Alitalia, for its part, asserts that neither Grappo's claim nor its counterclaim was pendent because the court had jurisdiction over the claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1330(a) (The district courts shall have original jurisdiction without regard to amount in controversy of any nonjury civil action against a foreign state....). See also 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1603 (definition of foreign state includes a corporation owned by a foreign government); 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1605(a) (foreign sovereign immunity does not extend to commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state). Alitalia, however, neither appealed nor cross-appealed from the dismissal of its counterclaim. 39 Because neither party appealed the dismissal of its claim, and without the benefit of full briefing, we decline to address the jurisdictional issue. On remand, the district court is free to reconsider its disposition of the two claims.