Opinion ID: 186237
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Congo's Repurchase of Occidental's Royalty Oil and Ensuing Events

Text: 17 In March 1996, Congo and Occidental signed an accord and satisfaction whereby Congo paid $215 million to buy back Occidental's remaining rights to the 50 million barrels that Occidental purchased from Congo pursuant to the 1994 Purchase Agreement. Complaint ¶ 40, at 13-14, J.A. 37-38; Accord and Satisfaction Agreement (Mar. 1, 1996) (Accord and Satisfaction), reprinted in J.A. 195-205. In identifying the royalty oil subject to repurchase by Congo, the Accord and Satisfaction specifically excluded oil assigned by Occidental to a third party pursuant to Section 9.2 of Amendment No. 1 dated 19 February 1994, to the Purchase Agreement. Id. Art. 1.9, at 2, J.A. 196. Moreover, in a separate article titled No Effect on Rights or Obligations of Third Parties, the Accord and Satisfaction referenced Article 9.2's assignment of oil to Gulf and stated that the assignment was not affected by the repurchase of Occidental's oil by Congo. Accord and Satisfaction Art. 7, at 6, J.A. 200; see also Complaint ¶ 42, at 14, J.A. 38. In other words, the Accord and Satisfaction did not alter the arrangement between Congo and Gulf or in any way diminish Gulf's interest in the royalty oil purchased from Congo. See Complaint ¶¶ 12, 43, at 5, 43, J.A. 29, 38. 18 The complaint alleges that in July 1996, several months after the execution of the Accord and Satisfaction, Congo stopped delivery of Gulf and Clark's royalty oil. Complaint ¶ 39, at 13, J.A. 37. It elaborates: Upon information and belief, Agip entered into an agreement with the Congo whereby the Congo directly sold the royalty oil to Agip. Id. ¶ 44, at 15, J.A. 39. 19 For purposes of its Rule 12(b)(1) motion, Congo did not dispute any of the facts alleged by Gulf, but argued only that the asserted facts were insufficient, as a matter of law, to abrogate Congo's sovereign immunity. Congo Br. at 3. The District Court agreed, finding that Congo retained its sovereign immunity to suit with respect to the claims made by Gulf. The District Court dismissed the complaint without prejudice and Gulf appealed.