Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LLC SPC STILEKS, Petitioner, v. Case No. 14-cv-1921 (CRC) THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION This is another installment in Petitioner LLC SPC Stileks’s efforts to enforce a 2013 arbitral award against Respondent t

DECISION AND ORDER VICTOR MARRERO, District Judge. Lead Plaintiffs Irrevocable Trust FBO Lansing Davis and the Davis Partnership LP brought this action on behalf of a potential class (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) of purchasers of common stock of China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. (“CCME”) between October 5, 2009 and March 11, 2011 (the “Class Period”) against defendants CCME, Zheng Cheng (“Cheng”

999 F.Supp. 1 (1998) Stephen M. FLATOW, Plaintiff, v. The ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, the Iranian Ministry of Information and Security, Ayatollah Ali Hoseini Khamenei, Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, Ali Fallahian-Khuzestani, and John Does 1-99, Defendants. No. 97-396 (RCL). United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 11, 1998.

ACCEPTED 03-14-00197-CV 4929353 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEX

JERRE S. WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge: Hester International Corporation (HIC) appeals the district court’s order granting the Federal Republic of Nigeria relief from a previous judgment and the court’s subsequent dismissal of HIC’s claim against Nigeria for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Jack M. Koonce appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for intervention in the case between HIC and Nigeria. We affirm the judgm

Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before publication in the PACIFIC REPORTER. Readers are requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, phone (907) 264-0608, fax (907) 264-0878, email corrections@akcourts.us. THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA STATE OF ALASKA, ) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & ) Supreme Court No. S

Justice THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. *1490 This case, now before us for the third time, requires us to decide whether the Constitution permits a State to be sued by a private party without its consent in the courts of a different State. We hold that it does not and overrule

ACCEPTED 01-15-00625-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS

579 F.Supp. 243 (1984) CANAL BARGE COMPANY, INC. v. CHINA OCEAN SHIPPING CO., etc. Civ. A. No. 82-5614. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. February 1, 1984. *244 Robert B. Acomb, Jr. and Robert T. Lemon, II, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff. Francis Emmett and James A. Cobb, Jr., New Orleans, La., for defendant.<

879 F.2d 170 14 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1074 HESTER INTERNATIONAL CORP., Plaintiff-Appellee,v.The FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, et al., Defendants-Appellees,v.Jack M. KOONCE, Individually and d/b/a Koonce EngineeringService, Movant-Appellant.HESTER INTERNATIONAL CORP., Plaintiff-Appellant,v.The FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, National Grains ProductionCo., Limited, A Company Incorporated in Nigeria

Slip Op. 14 - 146 UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE : CATFISH FARMERS OF AMERICA, et al., : : Plaintiffs, : : v. : Before: R. Kenton Musgrave, Senior Judge : UNITED STATES,

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2022 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 600 U. S. Part 1 Pages 181–411 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 29, 2023 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requ

Officers of the United States Within the Meaning of the Appointments Clause A position to which is delegated by legal authority a portion of the sovereign powers of the federal government and that is “continuing” is a federal office subject to the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. A person who would hold such a position must be properly made an “Officer[] of the United States” by being appointed pursuant to the procedures specified in the Ap

MEMORANDUM OPINION EMMET G. SULLIVAN, District Judge. Plaintiff, the DynaLantic Corporation (“DynaLantic”), is a small business that designs and manufactures aircraft, submarine, ship, and other simulators and training equipment. Plaintiff has brought this suit against Defendants — the Department of Defense (“DoD”), the Department of the Navy (

USCA11 Case: 23-12737 Document: 74-1 Date Filed: 11/04/2025 Page: 1 of 83 FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-12737 ____________________ YIFAN SHEN, ZHIMING XU,

MICHEL, Chief Judge. This case concerns the constitutionality of 10 U.S.C. § 2323 (“Section 1207”), which, in relevant part, (1) sets a “goal” that five percent of federal defense contracting dollars for each fiscal year be awarded to certain entities including small business concerns owned and controlled by “socially and economically disadvantaged individuals”; (2) incorporates

SUMMARY ORDER Chuan Wu Chen, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of a November 6, 2006, order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. In re Chuan Wu Chen, No. A75 962 152 (B.I.A. Nov. 6, 2006). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. When the BIA denies a motion to reopen, we review th

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge HARRY T. EDWARDS. HARRY T. EDWARDS, Circuit Judge: This case involves a lawsuit brought under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330, 1602-1611 (1999), by two American citizens who sued the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahi-riya (“Libya”) for torture and hostage taking. Plaintiffs

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Yan Qing Cao, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of a November 23, 2004 order of the BIA denying petitioner’s motion to reopen her removal proceedings. In re Yan Qing Cao, No. A 74 854 953 (B.I.A. Nov. 23, 2004). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. This Court reviews the BIA’s denial of a