Rinat Akhmetshin v. William Browder

Summary

The D.C. Circuit vacated dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction and remanded for jurisdictional discovery, holding that the government contacts exception to D.C.'s long-arm statute (D.C. Code § 13-423(a)(4)) only excludes direct contacts with federal government officials or agencies—not media interviews, book promotions, or think tank panels—even when those activities relate to a policy agenda. The court assumed without deciding that the exception applies to nonresident aliens, but found the district court's overly broad construction erroneous. The dissent argued for certification to the D.C. Court of Appeals on whether the exception extends to indirect advocacy and whether nonresident aliens can invoke it.

Holdings

1. The government contacts exception only excludes direct contacts with members, agents, or instrumentalities of the federal government from the personal jurisdiction calculus. It does not extend to media appearances, book promotions, interviews, or other activities that do not involve direct contact with federal officials.
2. The district court abused its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery because it relied on an erroneous legal conclusion that the government contacts exception excluded virtually all of Browder's contacts. Given that Browder's non-excluded contacts are significant, Akhmetshin is entitled to discovery to determine whether Browder engaged in a persistent course of conduct under the second plus factor.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred in concluding that it lacked personal jurisdiction over Browder.
2. Whether the district court applied an overly broad interpretation of the government contacts exception.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying jurisdictional discovery.

Disposition

vacated