Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran
33 F. Supp. 3d 1003
N.D. Ill.2014Background
- Plaintiffs seek attachment and execution on Iranian artifacts in US possession to satisfy a default judgment against Iran.
- Defendants move for summary judgment arguing FSIA and TRIA do not allow attachment of the artifacts.
- Persepolis and Chogha Mish Collections are in the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute on loan from Iran; largely for study.
- Herzfeld Collection and related OI Collection are in the Field Museum; ownership disputed and provenance contested.
- Court analyzes FSIA commercial activity exception (1610(a)) and 1610(g), and TRIA; ultimately holds no attachment permitted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 1610(a) commercial activity exception applies | Iran’s agent Institute performs commercial conduct; activity attributed to Iran | Commercial activity must be by the sovereign itself; agency not established | No; insufficient agency to trigger 1610(a) |
| Whether 1610(g) provides a standalone attachment basis | 1610(g) enables attachment of all terror-state assets | Section 1610(g) not independent; mirrors Bancec factors | No; does not create new basis for attachment |
| Whether TRIA assets are blocked assets subject to attachment | Assets are blocked under TRIA as Iran’s assets | Assets must be contested by Iran; here ownership not shown | No; assets not contested/blocked; not subject to TRIA attachment |
| Whether Herzfeld and OI collections are blocked assets or Iran-owned | Iran owns/contests ownership of these collections | Iran has not asserted ownership; not blocked assets under TRIA | Not blocked; TRIA not applicable; not subject to attachment |
Key Cases Cited
- Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 637 F.3d 783 (7th Cir.2011) (FSIA interpretations and agency/ownership issues relevant to attachment)
- Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 709 F.3d 49 (1st Cir.2013) (OFAC/EO 12281 interpretation clarifies contest ownership for TRIA blocked assets)
- Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 885 F.Supp.2d 429 (D.D.C.2012) ( §1610(g) context and execution against instrumentalities)
- In re Terrorism Litigation, 659 F.Supp.2d 31 (D.D.C.2009) (TRIA implications for attachments under §1610)