Gss Group Ltd. v. National Port Authority, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33617

GSS filed a petition to confirm two arbitral awards against the NPA under the New York Convention and FAA.
NPA is a Liberian public corporation; GSS contracted in 2005 to build/operate a container park in Monrovia, Liberia.
Contract and amendments required London arbitration under English law for disputes.
Arbitrator awarded GSS roughly $44.3 million for breach but NPA did not participate in the arbitration.
GSS seeks confirmation of awards in federal court in the District of Columbia; NPA moves to dismiss.
Court agrees the petition should be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction under the Due Process Clause.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court may exercise personal jurisdiction over NPA.	GSS asserts NPA is a foreign instrumentality; minimum contacts exist.	NPA has no meaningful contacts with the United States; due process violated.	No, the court lacks personal jurisdiction over NPA.
Whether FSIA provides a statutory basis for jurisdiction.	FSIA sovereign-immunity waiver supports jurisdiction.	FSIA provides subject-matter jurisdiction and service, but not minimum contacts analysis.	FSIA provides jurisdictional basis, but constitutional due process is still required (not satisfied here).

First Chicago Int'l v. United Exch. Co., 836 F.2d 1375 (D.C.Cir.1988) (establishes prima facie jurisdiction burden and factual showings)
FC Investment Group v. IFX Markets, Ltd., 479 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C.2007) (weigh affidavits to determine jurisdictional facts)
United States v. Philip Morris Inc., 116 F. Supp. 2d 116 (D.D.C.2000) (jurisdictional fact-finding framework)
Brunson v. Kalil & Co., 404 F. Supp. 2d 221 (D.D.C.2005) (jurisdictional analysis guidance)
Asahi Metal Indus. Co. v. Super. Ct., 480 U.S. 102 (1987) (minimum contacts test governs personal jurisdiction)
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408 (1984) (foreign corporation lacking minimum contacts not subject to suit)
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (1980) (defendant's forum contacts must be such to reasonably anticipate suit)
Price v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 294 F.3d 82 (D.C.Cir.2002) (foreign sovereigns and due process rights discussed; distinctions for instrumentality)
TMR Energy Ltd. v. State Property Fund of Ukraine, 411 F.3d 296 (D.C.Cir.2005) (foreign instrumentality may be indistinguishable from sovereign for due process)
Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174 (D.C.Cir.2004) (due process considerations in foreign-defendant contexts)