Nasrin Mohammadi v. Islamic Republic of Iran

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that courts of appeals have “overwhelmingly” reached the same conclusion
• “Since the court declined to set aside the judgment under Rule 59(e), it properly concluded that [the plaintiff’s] motion to amend under Rule 15(a) was moot.”
• “Since the court declined to set aside the judgment under Rule 59(e), it properly concluded that [the plaintiff's] motion to amend under Rule 15(a) was moot.”
• describing this as one of the terrorism exception’s “require[ments]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).