Epstein Secrets

attery. Actions were consoliclab ed by Multiclistrict Litigation Panel. Vari- ous defendants fded motions to dismiss. Holdings: The District Court, Casey, J., held that (1) jurisdictional discovery was warranted on issue whether Saudi Arabian bank was immune under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act

lly directed" his activities at the United States by sup- porting al Qaeda. Plaintiffs also submit that Mr. Aljomaih's company does busi- ness with General Motors and Shell Corpo- ration and that, therefore, he must have had contacts with the United States. See Opp. at 11; Statement of Jamie L. Paye attached

h is consistent with the leading case of State v. Casey, !7! which considered whether a victim's request

128 F.3d 1188, 1191 (7th Cir. 1997) (collecting cases); United States v. Hand, 863 F.2d 1100, 1104 (3d Cir. 1988) (it makes no sense to say that "if General Motors or Chase Manhattan Bank had funds stolen, in violation of federal criminal law, a DAVID SCHOEN HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017650 --- PAGE BREAK --- Page 16

battery. Actions were consolidat- ed by Multidistrict Litigation Panel. Vari- ous defendants filed motions to dismiss. Holdings: The District Court, Casey, J., held that: (1) jurisdictional discovery was warranted on issue whether Saudi Arabian bank was immune under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FS

fully directed” his activities at the United States by sup- porting al Qaeda. Plaintiffs also submit that Mr. Aljomaih’s company does busi- ness with General Motors and Shell Corpo- ration and that, therefore, he must have had contacts with the United States. See Opp. at 11; Statement of Jamie L. Paye attached to