About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - August 2021)

handle is hein.ali/resfrlus0048 and id is 1 raw text is: FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES 2D PART I. JURISDICTION CHAPTER 4. IMMUNITIES FROM JURISDICTION TOPIC 2. IMMUNITIES OF FOREIGN STATE § 66. Applicability of Immunity of Foreign State N.D.Cal.2020. Cit. in case cit. in sup. (general cite). Instant-messaging service and its corporate parent sued technology companies, alleging that defendants used plaintiffs' service to send malware to approximately 1,400 mobile phones and devices, in order to infect the phones and devices for the purpose of surveilling their users. This court granted defendants' motion to stay discovery pending their appeal from a prior order determining that they could not assert sovereign immunity derived from their clients that were sovereign nations. In making its decision, the court cited the Restatement Second of Foreign Relations Law in noting that, if defendants prevailed in establishing common-law foreign official immunity, that immunity would operate as immunity from suit, not simply immunity from liability. WhatsApp Inc. v. NSO Group Technologies Limited, 491 F.Supp.3d 584, 590. N.D.Cal.2020. Cit. in cases cit. in sup.; subsec. (f) quot. in case quot. in sup. Developer and owner of encrypted-communications application sued Israeli surveillance-technology companies, alleging, inter alia, that defendants breached the application's terms of service and violated state and federal cybersecurity laws by sending malware on behalf of foreign sovereign nations to third-party mobile phones and devices owned by attorneys, human-rights activists, and political dissidents through plaintiffs' application. This court denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that defendants were not entitled to conduct-based foreign official immunity. Citing Restatement Second of Foreign Relations Law § 66, the court explained that, even though defendants were agents of foreign governments, plaintiffs brought claims against them in their personal capacity and did not seek compensation out of state funds, and thus plaintiffs' claims would not force the court to exercise jurisdiction in a manner that would enforce a rule of law against foreign states. WhatsApp Inc. v. NSO Group Technologies Limited, 472 F.Supp.3d 649, 664. PART IV. RESPONSIBILITY OF STATES FOR INJURIES TO ALIENS CHAPTER 3. INJURIES TO ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF ALIENS TOPIC 2. TAKING OF PROPERTY § 186. Failure to Pay Just Compensation for Taking COPYRIGHT ©2021 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most