Legal Opinion
Orient Mineral Co. v. Bank of China
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided October 24, 2007No. 05-4037, 05-4048, 05-4220PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
These appeals require this court to determine, among other things, the extent to which investors in Chinese gold mines can sue the Bank of China (the “Bank”) in an American court. Because the Bank was owned and operated by the People’s Republic of China, an American court’s subject matter jurisdiction must be found under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602-11. The FSIA provides that a foreign sovereign is generally immune from suit in the United States. See id. § 1604. The FSIA’s commercial activity exceptions, however, permit a foreign…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Semtek International Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Verlinden B. v. v. Central Bank of NigeriaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Republic of Argentina v. Weltover, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Saudi Arabia v. NelsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- O'Bryan v. Holy SeeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Global Technology, Inc. v. Yubei (Xinxiang) Power Steering System Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
- Green v. Haskell County Board of CommissionersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Leathers v. LeathersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- Hansen v. PT Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero)Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.