Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether the court of appeals erred in treating Canada's legislative decision to compensate its consular employees for workplace injuries exclusively under Canadian law as a mere omission to comply with state law, and thus as "commercial activity" within 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2).
2. Whether the court of appeals erred in deeming Canada's setting of conditions of full-time employment within the Canadian Consulate "commercial activity" within 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2), based on the employee's U.S. citizenship and allegedly "clerical" job duties.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the court of appeals erred in treating Canada's legislative decision to compensate its consular employees for workplace injuries exclusively under Canadian law as a mere omission to comply with state law, and thus as 'commercial activity' within 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2)
2020-05-06
Reply of petitioner Canada filed. (Distributed)
2020-05-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/21/2020.
2020-04-21
Brief of respondent Cynthia L. Merlini in opposition filed.
2020-03-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 22, 2020.
2020-03-10
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 8, 2020 to April 22, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-03-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 8, 2020)
2020-01-10
Application (19A768) granted by Justice Breyer extending the time to file until March 6, 2020.
2020-01-07
Application (19A768) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 21, 2020 to March 6, 2020, submitted to Justice Breyer.