Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.

CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd.

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Supreme Court of the United States
CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd.
Term: 2024
Important Dates
Argued: March 3, 2025
Decided: June 5, 2025
Outcome
reversed
Vote
9-0
Majority
Samuel Alito • Chief Justice John Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan • Neil Gorsuch • Brett Kavanaugh • Amy Coney Barrett • Ketanji Brown Jackson

CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 5, 2025, during the court's October 2024-2025 term. The case was argued on March 3, 2025.

The Court reversed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a 9-0 ruling, holding the Ninth Circuit improperly imposed an additional requirement not codified in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion of the court. Click here for more information about the ruling.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The issue: The case concerned jurisdictional requirements under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). Click here to learn more about the case's background.
  • The questions presented: "Whether plaintiffs must prove minimum contacts before federal courts may assert personal jurisdiction over foreign states sued under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act."[1]
  • The outcome: The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.


    • The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. To review the lower court's opinion, click here.

    Background

    Case summary

    The following are the parties to this case:[2]

    • Petitioner: CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited, et al.
      • Legal counsel: Matthew Dempsey McGill (Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP), Aaron Michael Street (Baker Botts, L.L.P.)
    • Respondent: Antrix Corp. Ltd., et al.
      • Legal counsel: Carter G. Phillips (Sidley Austin LLP), Amanda Shafer Berman (Crowell & Moring LLP)

    The following summary of the case was published by Oyez:[3]

    “ This case involves an agreement between two Indian corporations, Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. and Antrix Corp. Ltd. After a dispute arose, Devas obtained an arbitration award from the International Chamber of Commerce against Antrix. Devas then sought to confirm this award in a U.S. district court. Antrix challenged the court’s personal jurisdiction, but the district court confirmed the award, concluding that a minimum contacts analysis was unnecessary under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).

    Antrix appealed the confirmation order, arguing that the district court erred in exercising personal jurisdiction without conducting a minimum contacts analysis. Meanwhile, a group of intervenors, including CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd. and others, moved to register the judgment in the Eastern District of Virginia. Both Antrix and Devas challenged this registration order. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that the plaintiff must prove minimum contacts, and its failure to do so meant it could not exercise personal jurisdiction over Antrix.[4]

    		”

    To learn more about this case, see the following:


    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[1]

    Questions presented:
    “ Whether plaintiffs must prove minimum contacts before federal courts may assert personal jurisdiction over foreign states sued under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.[4] ”

    Oral argument

    Audio

    Audio of oral argument:[6]




    Transcript

    Transcript of oral argument:[7]

    Outcome

    The Court reversed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a 9-0 ruling, holding the Ninth Circuit improperly imposed an additional requirement not codified in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion of the court.[8]

    Opinion

    In the majority opinion of the court, Justice Alito wrote:[8]

    “ This suit concerns the FSIA's [Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act] neighboring personal jurisdiction provision. It provides that “[p]ersonal jurisdiction over a foreign state shall exist” whenever (1) an exception to foreign sovereign immunity applies, and (2) the foreign defendant has been properly served. §1330(b). In the decision below, however, the Ninth Circuit imposed a third requirement: a plaintiff must also prove that the foreign state has made “minimum contacts” with the United States sufficient to satisfy the jurisdictional test set forth in International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U. S. 310, 316 (1945), and its progeny. Because the Ninth Circuit’s additional requirement goes beyond the text of the FSIA, we reverse.[4] ”


    Text of opinion

    Read the full opinion here.

    October term 2024-2025

    See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025

    The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 7, 2024. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[9]


    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "23-1201 CC/DEVAS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED V. ANTRIX CORP. LTD. QP", October 4, 2024
    2. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "No. 23-1201," accessed November 21, 2024
    3. ↑ Oyez, "CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd.," accessed November 21, 2024
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    5. ↑ United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. v. Antrix Corp., decided August 1, 2023
    6. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Oral Argument - Audio," argued March 3, 2025
    7. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Oral Argument - Transcript," argued March 3, 2025
    8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "CC/DEVAS (MAURITIUS) LTD. ET AL. v. ANTRIX CORP. LTD. ET AL.," June 5, 2025
    9. ↑ SupremeCourt.gov, "The Supreme Court at Work: The Term and Caseload," accessed January 24, 2022
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=CC/Devas_(Mauritius)_Limited_v._Antrix_Corp._Ltd.&oldid=10408106"