University of Minnesota Human Rights Library

MEMORANDUM

To: International Human Rights Law Class Date: September 30, 2005

From: Adjunct Professor Duane Krohnke

Re: October 14, 2005 Class

U.S. ADJUDICATIVE REMEDIES FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS OUTSIDE THE U.S.

I. Reading Assignment

Chapter 14, pp. 757-59, 763-822

Fourth Supplement to Chapter 14, dated September 30, 2005 (http://hrlibrary.law.umn.edu/intlhr/) [DO NOT READ THE PRIOR SUPPLEMENTS.]

Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 124 S. Ct. 2739, 159 L.Ed.2d 718 0 (2004)[edited version]

Second Amended Complaint, Saleh v. Titan Corp. ¶¶ 1-19, 24-28, 37-42, 51-60, 63-73, 101-133, 154-166, 210-232, 241-247 (July 30, 2004)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendant Titan’s Motion To Dismiss at 1-12, 24-31, 49-50, Saleh v. Titan Corp. (Sept. 10, 2004)

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendant Titan’s Motion To Dismiss at 1-26, 43, Saleh v. Titan Corp. (Oct. 22, 2004)

The above additional materials will be posted to: http://hrlibrary.law.umn.edu/intlhr.

II. Moot Court

After a brief introduction, the class will convene as a moot session of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota to hear arguments on a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint in Saleh for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Professor Krohnke will be the district judge.

After the filing of the dismissal motion and the parties’ memoranda of points and authorities, the Court issued the following order:

At the hearing on October 14, 2005, the Court will hear arguments on the motion to dismiss the following claims:

Claim	Time Limit (minutes)
Counts V & VI: ATCA—Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment & Enforced Disappearance
Defendant Titan	15
Plaintiffs	15
Counts VII & IX: ATCA—Arbitrary Detention & Crimes Against Humanity
Defendant Titan	15
Plaintiffs	15

The Court at another hearing to be scheduled will hear arguments on the motion to dismiss the other claims in the Second Amended Complaint.

After the oral argument, the entire class will be invited to join the discussion.

The actual Saleh case was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, which denied defendants’ motion to enjoin a subsequent action by putative class members and then granted defendants’ motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. ( Saleh v. Titan Corp., 353 F. Supp. 2d 1087 (S.D.Cal. 2004); Saleh v. Titan Corp., 361 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (2005).

See generally Center for Constitutional Rights, Saleh v. Titan,

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/legal/september_11th/sept11Article.asp?ObjID=8tzsXQmAh2&Content=423.

Home || Treaties || Search || Links