Opinion ID: 2538
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Background Law and Standard of Review

Text: The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) is the sole source for subject matter jurisdiction over any action against a foreign state. Kensington Int'l Ltd. v. Itoua, 505 F.3d 147, 153 (2d Cir. 2007) (internal quotation marks omitted); see 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330(a), 1604. The FSIA provides that foreign sovereigns are immune from suit unless a specific exception to sovereign immunity applies. Id. § 1604. One such exception is that a foreign state is not immune from suit in any case ... in which the foreign state has waived its immunity either explicitly or by implication. [3] Id. § 1605(a)(1). The term explicit, in this context, takes its normal meaning of clear and unambiguous. Libra Bank Ltd. v. Banco Nacional de Costa Rica, S.A., 676 F.2d 47, 49 (2d Cir.1982) (interpreting 28 U.S.C. § 1610(d)). The purpose of an explicit waiver requirement is to preclude inadvertent, implied, or constructive waiver in cases where the intent of the foreign state is equivocal or ambiguous. Id. On appeal from a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, we review the district court's legal conclusions de novo.... Correspondent Servs. Corp. v. First Equities Corp. of Fla., 442 F.3d 767, 769 (2d Cir.2006) (per curiam). The interpretation of a contract is a legal question which is also reviewed de novo. Phillips v. Audio Active Ltd., 494 F.3d 378, 384 (2d Cir.2007).