AHMED RHUMA V. STATE OF LIBYA, No. 14-17511 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED AUG 3 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AHMED T. RHUMA; SAM J. DUVAL, FKA Adel A. Rhoma, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 14-17511 D.C. No. 2:13-cv-02286-MCE-AC Plaintiffs-Appellants, MEMORANDUM* v. STATE OF LIBYA, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 26, 2016** Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Ahmed T. Rhuma and Sam J. Duval appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo subject matter * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”). Gupta v. Thai Airways Int’l, Ltd., 487 F.3d 759, 765 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm. The district court properly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims against Libya because plaintiffs failed to establish an exception to Libya’s immunity under the FSIA. See id. at 763 (a court may only exercise subject matter jurisdiction over a foreign sovereign when one of the exceptions to immunity under the FSIA applies). AFFIRMED. 2 14-17511
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
