In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit

August Term, 2022

(Submitted: February 14, 2023 Decided: February 19, 2025)

Docket No. 22-1506

DR. AHMED DIAA ELDIN ALI HUSSEIN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

–v.–

DR. MOHAMED AHMED MAAIT, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MINISTER OF FINANCE OF THE ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPT,

Defendant-Appellee.

B e f o r e:

SACK, CARNEY, and NATHAN, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff-Appellant Dr. Ahmed Diaa Eldin Ali Hussein is a dual citizen of the Arab Republic of Egypt and of the United States. Hussein, who has residences in both Egypt and the United States, seeks enforcement in the United States of an Egyptian administrative court ruling and a related ministerial decree (together, the “Egyptian Judgment”). Payment of the Egyptian Judgment would purportedly compensate Hussein for Egypt’s expropriation in the 1990s of Hussein’s shares in an Egyptian company, the SIMO Middle East Paper Company. His enforcement action in New York State court named Dr. Mohamed Ahmed Maait, in his official capacity as Minister of Finance of Egypt, as defendant. Maait removed the suit from New York state court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, see 28 U.S.C. § 1441(d) (authorizing removal of suits against foreign states), but filed his removal notice after the presumptive 30-day deadline, see id. § 1446. The District Court (Rakoff, J.) found that Maait could avail himself of Section 1441(d) because Egypt was implicated in the suit and also found “cause” under Section 1441(d) to enlarge the time for removal. It then dismissed the suit under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), concluding that Egypt is the real party in interest and that it is immune under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), because Hussein failed to establish that any exception under the FSIA applies. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1391, 1441, 1601 et seq. Hussein now appeals. On clear error review of factual findings and de novo review of the legal conclusion, we affirm the District Court’s determination that Egypt is the real party in interest in Hussein’s suit, that the FSIA applies, and that it affords presumptive immunity to Maait. See Samantar v. Yousuf, 560 U.S. 305, 324–26 (2010). Reviewing for abuse of discretion the District Court’s finding of “cause” under Section 1441(d) to enlarge the timing for noticing removal, we identify no error. Finally, we determine that Hussein has waived any argument regarding the application of any exception to FSIA immunity. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction.

Jonathan R. Jeremias, Alan E. Sash, McLaughlin & Stern, LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Linda Goldstein, Dechert LLP, New York, NY; Tiffany E. Engsell, Dechert LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for Defendant- Appellee.

CARNEY, Circuit Judge:

This case requires us to consider when a suit against an individual foreign government official is properly treated as an action against the foreign state itself, as the real party in interest, for purposes of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (the “FSIA”). 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1391, 1441, 1601–1611. We also consider the standards under

2 which we will review a district court’s finding of “cause” to enlarge the time for a foreign state to file a notice of removal. Id. § 1