Federal Insurance v. Al Qaida

Background

This order concerns Federal Insurance Co. v. al Qaida and related cases within multidistrict litigation about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. On March 2, 2023, the court set a schedule for expected motions to exclude expert witnesses and a renewed motion to dismiss. The court also addressed additional disputes about discovery, page limits, confidentiality review, and the role of the Ashton plaintiffs.

Discovery ruling

The Ashton plaintiffs asked for permission to file a motion seeking additional discovery. The requested discovery concerned the court’s jurisdiction over the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The court noted that this jurisdiction-related discovery had closed on July 1, 2022, and that it had previously said newly declassified intelligence reports would not justify extending discovery without extraordinary circumstances. The court found no compelling reason to reopen discovery and stated that the plaintiffs had already had a fully adequate opportunity to conduct it. The court therefore denied the motion for leave to file a motion to compel additional discovery.

Expert-witness motions

The plaintiffs’ Executive Committees and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia disagreed about page limits for anticipated motions to exclude expert testimony. The court said it would accept one such motion from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Dallah Avco, and one from the plaintiffs, including any unique experts presented by the Ashton plaintiffs. The court requested letters by March 22, 2023, identifying how many experts each side intended to challenge and inviting proposals for a page limit per expert. It warned that it might limit the number of challenges if the proposed motions were unmanageable.

Confidentiality review

The court reminded the parties that documents submitted with motions that could resolve claims are generally presumed to be available to the public. It said that redactions in connection with the expected expert-witness motions would require a compelling justification. The court ordered the defendants, the plaintiffs’ Executive Committees, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to meet and discuss a confidentiality-review process by April 14, 2023.

Renewed motion to dismiss and conclusion

The parties also disputed page limits and the Ashton plaintiffs’ role in briefing the anticipated renewed motion to dismiss. The court asked them to consider whether separate filings would duplicate allegations in the Consolidated Amended Complaint and the Ashton Complaint. It directed the parties to meet and confer and submit joint or separate letters by April 5, 2023. The parties were ordered to appear for a conference on April 11, 2023, unless the court later adjourned it because they reached a reasonable agreement.

Judge Sarah Netburn’s order thus denied the Ashton plaintiffs’ request to pursue additional discovery and established further procedures and deadlines. It did not decide the anticipated expert-witness-exclusion motions or the renewed motion to dismiss.