Luis Mujica v. Airscan Inc.
771 F.3d 580
9th Cir.2014Background
- In December 1998 Colombian Air Force helicopters bombed Santo Domingo, Colombia, killing 17 civilians; plaintiffs allege Occidental Petroleum and AirScan (U.S. corporations) provided material and logistical support and aided targeting.
- Plaintiffs sued in California (2003) under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), and California tort and UCL claims. Defendants moved to dismiss.
- Colombian authorities prosecuted and convicted three CAF officers (criminal), and a Colombian civil action produced a settlement and payments to victims. Plaintiffs did not sue the U.S. corporations in those Colombian proceedings.
- The district court initially denied dismissal on forum non conveniens/comity grounds but dismissed the case as nonjusticiable under the political-question doctrine. The Ninth Circuit remanded limited issues (prudential exhaustion and effect of Colombian decisions).
- On limited remand the district court found prudential exhaustion not required, and that Colombia would likely provide available remedies; appeals followed. The Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal on federal and state-law grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Viability of TVPA claims against corporate defendants | TVPA provides a remedy for torture/extrajudicial killing; corporations should be liable | TVPA covers only "individuals" (natural persons) | Dismissed — Mohamad forecloses TVPA claims against corporations (TVPA covers natural persons only) |
| ATS extraterritorial reach | ATS claims should proceed because defendants are U.S. corporations and some decision-making occurred in U.S. offices; request leave to amend | ATS presumption against extraterritoriality bars claims based on conduct in Colombia; mere U.S. corporate status is insufficient | Dismissed — under Kiobel plaintiffs failed to plead ATS claims that "touch and concern" the U.S. with sufficient force; no adequate non-speculative domestic conduct alleged, and leave to amend denied as futile |
| State-law claims in federal court (comity) | California forum appropriate to adjudicate state-law torts against U.S. corporations | International comity and U.S. foreign policy interests favor abstention because Colombia has strong interests and provided remedies | Dismissed on international comity grounds — district court applied wrong legal standard (required "true conflict"); Ninth Circuit reverses that step and finds comity warrants abstention given U.S. Executive Branch views, Colombia's interest, and adequacy of Colombian forum |
| Appellate jurisdiction/timeliness of appeal | Plaintiffs' original 2005 appeal preserved jurisdiction over the limited remand | Defendants argued their 2010 conditional appeals defeated jurisdiction | Ninth Circuit retains jurisdiction based on plaintiffs’ original timely notice of appeal (2005) |
Key Cases Cited
- Mohamad v. Palestinian Auth., 132 S. Ct. 1702 (U.S. 2012) (TVPA statutory "individual" limited to natural persons)
- Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S. Ct. 1659 (U.S. 2013) (presumption against extraterritoriality: ATS claims must "touch and concern" U.S. territory with sufficient force)
- Sosa v. Alvarez–Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (U.S. 2004) (ATS is jurisdictional; federal courts may recognize limited international-law torts)
- Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (U.S. 1962) (political-question factors)
- Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. California, 509 U.S. 764 (U.S. 1993) (comity/prescriptive-comity analysis and "true conflict" discussion)
- Ungaro–Benages v. Dresdner Bank AG, 379 F.3d 1227 (11th Cir. 2004) (comity factors: U.S. interest, foreign interest, adequacy of forum)
- Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of Am., 549 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1976) (comity/jurisdictional factors considered in extraterritorial contexts)
- Mujica v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., 564 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir. 2009) (Ninth Circuit limited remand directing district court to consider prudential exhaustion and Colombian proceedings)