OBB Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13-1067 | 9th Cir. | Oct 5, 2015 | Dec 1, 2015 | 9-0 | Roberts | OT 2015 |
Holding: A California woman’s lawsuit against the Austrian national railroad for injuries that she suffered while attempting to board a train in Austria does not fall within the “commercial activity” exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and is therefore barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Although the plaintiff purchased a Eurail pass in the United States, her lawsuit is not “based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by a foreign state” because the conduct constituting the gravamen of her suit occurred in Austria.
Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on December 1, 2015.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- First decision of the Term is a unanimous one in Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act case (Amy Howe, December 1, 2015)
- Argument analysis: Justices leaning in favor of foreign railroad in immunity dispute (Amy Howe, October 5, 2015)
- Argument preview: Justices to take on sovereign immunity in the Internet age (Amy Howe, October 1, 2015)
- Court to rule on lethal-injection protocol (Lyle Denniston, January 23, 2015)
- Petition of the day (Maureen Johnston, May 14, 2014)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| Mar 5 2014 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 7, 2014) |
| Apr 2 2014 | Brief of respondent Carol P. Sachs in opposition filed. |
| Apr 7 2014 | Brief amicus curiae of The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands filed. |
| Apr 7 2014 | Brief amicus curiae of International Rail Transport Committee (CIT) filed. |
| Apr 15 2014 | Reply of petitioner OBB Personenverkehr AG filed. |
| Apr 16 2014 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 2, 2014. |
| Apr 29 2014 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 15, 2014. |
| May 19 2014 | The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. |
| Dec 15 2014 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. |
| Dec 26 2014 | Supplemental brief of petitioner OBB Personenverkehr AG filed. (Distributed) |
| Dec 30 2014 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 16, 2015. |
| Jan 20 2015 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 23, 2015. |
| Jan 23 2015 | Petition GRANTED. |
| Feb 23 2015 | The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including April 17, 2015. |
| Feb 23 2015 | The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including June 29, 2015. |
| Apr 17 2015 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed) |
| Apr 17 2015 | Brief of petitioner OBB Personenverkehr AG filed. |
| Apr 23 2015 | Brief amicus curiae of International Rail Transport Committee (CIT) filed. |
| Apr 24 2015 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. |
| Apr 24 2015 | Brief amici curiae of The Governments of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Swiss Confederation filed. |
| Jun 26 2015 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. |
| Jun 29 2015 | Brief of respondent Carol P. Sachs filed. |
| Jul 6 2015 | Brief amicus curiae of NML Capital, Ltd. filed. |
| Jul 28 2015 | Reply of petitioner OBB Personenverkehr AG filed. (Distributed) |
| Jul 29 2015 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, October 5, 2015. |
| Jul 31 2015 | CIRCULATED. |
| Aug 12 2015 | Record requested from U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit. |
| Aug 12 2015 | The Record from U.S.C.A. is electronic and located on PACER. |
| Aug 28 2015 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. |
| Oct 5 2015 | Argued. For petitioner: Juan C. Basombrio, Costa Mesa, Cal.; and Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. |
| Dec 1 2015 | Judgment REVERSED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. |
| Jan 5 2016 | JUDGMENT ISSUED |
