Summary

SRINIVASAN, Chief Judge: Over six decades ago, Exxon owned multiple subsidiaries in Cuba that in turn owned various oil and gas assets. In 1960, the Cuban government expropriated those assets without compensating Exxon.

In 1996, Congress enacted the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, which furnishes a cause of action against those who traffic in property confiscated by the Cuban government. Exxon brought suit under that Act against three state-owned defendants. Exxon's suit contends that the defendants currently traffic in confiscated property by participating in the oil industry and operating service stations using the property.

One of the defendants unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the complaint based on foreign sovereign immunity. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) generally bars United States courts from exercising jurisdiction over foreign sovereign entities like the defendants in this case. The district court held that the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act does not itself overcome a foreign sovereign's general immunity from suit under the FSIA, and that jurisdiction in this case thus depends on the applicability of an FSIA exception. The court determined that the FSIA's expropriation exception does not apply in the circumstances but that the FSIA's commercial- activity exception does.

We agree with the district court that the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act does not confer jurisdiction in this case and that the FSIA's expropriation exception is inapplicable. As for the commercial-activity exception, we conclude that the district court needed to undertake additional analysis before determining that jurisdiction exists under that exception. We thus vacate the district court's decision and remand the case for further analysis on the applicability of the FSIA's commercial-activity exception.

...