John Doe I v. Nestle, USA
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17429
9th Cir.2014Background
- Former child slaves on Ivorian cocoa plantations allege ATS liability against Nestle USA, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Cargill Cocoa for aiding and abetting child slavery.
- District court dismissed for failure to state a claim; Ninth Circuit reverses, vacates, and remands for further proceedings.
- Defendants allegedly provided financial and technical support to cocoa farmers, known about child slavery, and exercised control over the Ivorian cocoa market.
- Defendants lobbied against federal slave-free labeling legislation; involvement framed as maintaining cheapest sources of cocoa.
- Court adopts a norm-by-norm approach to corporate ATS liability and distinguishes international-law norms from domestic-law consequences; remands to consider Kiobel II and Perisic/Taylor guidance.
- Conclusion: district court’s dismissal reversed; case remanded for further amendment consistent with this opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate liability under ATS for private actors | Sarei norm-by-norm supports corporate liability | Kiobel-panel limitations imply restricted corporate liability | Norm-by-norm analysis confirms corporate liability for slave labor under ATS |
| Mens rea for aiding and abetting ATS claims | Knowledge or purpose standard applies; allegations show purpose | Some circuits require purpose; knowledge insufficient | Court adopts purpose standard as applicable, allows amendment to prove purpose or direction |
| Actus reus of aiding and abetting in ATS | Allegations show substantial assistance linked to the crime | Debate over “specific direction” requirement; insufficient specificity | Remands to permit amendment consistent with Perisic and Taylor; no fixed standard adopted yet |
| Extraterritorial reach post Kiobel II | Some conduct within United States; potential US nexus | Kiobel II forecloses extraterritorial ATS claims absent sufficient touch/concern | Remands to allow amendment; does not decide Kiobel II bar on current record |
Key Cases Cited
- Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir.1980) (pioneered ATS as jurisdictional vehicle for international-law torts)
- Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (U.S. 2004) (established federal common-law basis for contemporary international-law torts under ATS; cautioned restraint)
- Khulumani v. Barclay Nat’l Bank Ltd., 504 F.3d 254 (2d Cir.2007) (endorsed knowledge-based discussion of international norms in ATS context)
- Sarei v. Rio Tinto PLC (en banc), 671 F.3d 736 (9th Cir.2011) (norm-by-norm corporate liability; universal/am universal norms can bind corporations)
- Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S. Ct. 1659 (U.S. 2013) (presumption against extraterritoriality governs ATS claims; touch/concern standard introduced)
- Prosecutor v. Blagojevic, No. IT-02-60-A (ICTY, 2007) (knowledge standard for mens rea in aiding and abetting (ICTY))