Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC

The Court will consider whether, under federal admiralty law, a choice-of-law clause in a maritime contract can be rendered unenforceable if enforcement is contrary to the “strong public policy” of the state whose law is displaced. The Third Circuit held that The Bremen’s framework for determining whether a forum selection clause is enforceable should be extended to choice-of-law clauses.


Blenheim Capital Holdings, Ltd. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

The petition asks whether a government’s purchase of military equipment is a commercial activity for purposes of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s commercial activity exception.

Wamai v. Industrial Bank of Korea

The petition asks the Court to consider how much deference federal courts should give U.S. plaintiffs’ choice of forum when they are joined by foreign co-plaintiffs.

Eastern Pacific Shipping PTE, Limited v. Ganpat (cert. denied Dec. 11, 2023)

The petition asks the Court to resolve an acknowledged circuit split between "permissive" and "restrictive" approaches to whether district courts may issue anti-suit injunctions in transnational cases.

Elbaz v. United States (cert. denied Oct. 10, 2023)

The petition asks the Court to decide whether the federal wire-fraud statute applies extraterritorially and, if not, whether it can be applied to foreign conduct by foreign actors as part of a foreign scheme if the scheme only involves an incidental domestic wire transmission.

Falkbuilt Ltd. v. Dirtt Environmental Solutions (cert. denied Oct. 2, 2023)

The petition asks the Court to clarify whether, in a multi-defendant case, district courts are prohibited from dismissing any defendant under the doctrine of forum non conveniens unless a single adequate alternative forum exists wherein all defendants can be sued.

Laydon v. Cooperatieve Rabobank U.A. (cert. denied Oct. 2, 2023)

The petition asks the Court to determine whether courts may consider factors other than the location of the conduct relevant to a statute’s focus in deciding if a claim involves a domestic application of that statute.

Prior Terms

Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International Inc. (2023)

The Court held that the Lanham Act (the federal trademark statute) does not apply extraterritorially and that a domestic application of the statute requires use of the trademark in domestic commerce. Regarding the presumption against extraterritoriality more broadly, the majority emphasized that conduct related to a non-extraterritorial statute's focus must occur in the United States, even if the focus itself is not about conduct.

Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway (2023)

The Court held that Pennsylvania's registration statute, which requires non-Pennsylvania companies registering to do business within the state to accept general personal jurisdiction in Pennsylvania courts, does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision provides states with an option for establishing broader personal jurisdiction over foreign businesses.

Yegiazaryan v. Smagin (2023)

The Court held that racketeering activity to avoid paying a U.S. judgment confirming a foreign arbitration award against a U.S. resident constituted a domestic injury for purposes of RICO's private right of action, even though the judgment creditor lives in Russia and both parties are Russian nationals. The Court declined to state a bright-line rule for locating injuries to intangible property, instead emphasizing the need for a "contextual approach."

Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh (2023)

The Court held that the plaintiffs' allegations that a social media site had aided and abetted ISIS in terrorist attacks abroad failed to state a claim under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.

Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States (2023)

The Court held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not apply to criminal cases and remanded for consideration of the applicability of common law immunities.

ZF Automotive v. Luxshare (2022)

The Supreme Court held that, although 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) permits a district court to order discovery "for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal,” only a governmental or intergovernmental adjudicative body may qualify as such a tribunal, and the arbitration panels in these cases were not such adjudicative bodies.

Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation (2022)

The Supreme Court held that In a suit raising non-federal claims against a foreign state or instrumentality under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a court should determine the substantive law by using the same choice-of-law rule applicable in a similar suit against a private party.