Court denies dismissal in case against alleged Islamic charitable trust for 9/11 terrorist support

In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 392 F.Supp.2d 539 (2005) 10 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 789 [20] [21] [22] Federal Civil Procedure @ Jurisdictional discovery Federal Courts @ Dismissal or other disposition District Court would deny without prejudice purported Islamic charitable trust’s motion to dismiss, for lack of personal jurisdiction, complaint in action alleging provision of support for terrorists involved in September 11th attacks, pending further jurisdictional discovery as to whether trust’s activities were directed at the United States; U.S. Government had designated the trust a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 12(b)(2), 28 US.C.A. 1 Cases that cite this headnote Federal Civil Procedure Jurisdictional discovery Courts enjoy great discretion in deciding whether to order jurisdictional discovery before resolving motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 12(b)(2), 28 US.C.A. 1 Cases that cite this headnote Federal Courts @ Terrorism Pursuant to ule establishing personal jurisdiction in any district court for cases arising under federal law where defendant had sufficient contacts with the United States as a whole but was not subject to jurisdiction in any particular state, District Court had personal jurisdiction, in action alleging provision of support for terrorists involved in September 11th attacks, over defendant alleged to be a founder and leader of terrorist organization responsible for the attacks; defendant had purposefully directed his activities at the U.S. Fed.Rules WESTLAW [23] [24] Civ.Proc.Rules 4(k)(2), 12(b)(2), 28 U.S.C.A. 2 Cases that cite this headnote Constitutional Law Non-profit, charitable, and educational organizations Federal Courts Terrorism District Court had personal jurisdiction, under rule establishing personal jurisdiction for cases arising under federal law where defendant had sufficient contacts with the United States as a whole but was not subject to jurisdiction in any particular state, over purported Islamic relief organization, for purposes of action alleging provision of support for terrorists involved in September 11th attacks; organization purposefully directed its activities at the U.S., satisfying due process minimum contacts requirement, inasmuch as it operated in the U.S. and was involved in supporting attacks and activities of the terrorist organization. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5; Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rules 4(k)(2), 12(b)(2), 28 U.S.C.A. Cases that cite this headnote Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Association with or participation in enterprise; control or intent To state a claim for liability under civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), plaintiffs must allege that defendants participated in the operation or management of the enterprise itself, which requires that these defendants must have had some part in directing the enterprise’s affairs. 18 US.C.A. § 1962(c). Cases that cite this headnote HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017908