Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.
, 544 U.S. 280 (2005), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
clarified the Rooker-Feldman doctrine
and its relation to preclusion and concurrent jurisdiction
Facts & Procedural Posture
In 1980, two subsidiaries of Exxon Mobil Corporation
and petitioner in this matter) formed a joint venture
/respondent Saudi Basic Industries Corporation
(SABIC). Twenty years later, a dispute arose over royalties
SABIC had charged Exxon Mobil's subsidiaries
to a polyethylene
manufacturing method, and SABIC sued the two subsidiaries in Delaware Superior Court
in July 2000.
Instead of first filing a counterclaim
in the Delaware
state court system, Exxon Mobil and its subsidiaries chose to sue SABIC in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
. There, they alleged that SABIC had overcharged the subsidiaries for the sublicenses. Exxon Mobil claimed subject-matter jurisdiction
in federal court under , which gives the United States district courts
jurisdiction over foreign states.
In January 2002, Exxon Mobil filed an answer to SABIC's complaint in the Delaware state court, asserting the same counterclaims that they had filed in federal court. Meanwhile, SABIC moved
the federal suit. The district court denied the motion. The state suit reached trial first, and the jury returned a huge verdict for Exxon Mobil, totalling over $400 million. SABIC... Read More