Whether the D.C. Circuit correctly held that there is a 'direct effect' in the United States under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act when the plaintiffs' alleged loss flowed through three foreign companies and two countries before being booked in the United States

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Respondents invested in a Luxembourgian subsidiary, which invested in another Luxembourgian subsidiary, which invested in a Brazilian corporation, which invested in a Brazilian investment fund. Respondents allege that Petitioner, a sovereign instrumentality of Brazil, defrauded them by inducing them to invest. They further allege that their investment in their Luxembourgian subsidiaries became less valuable when the Brazilian investment fund sought judicial restructuring protections. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the D.C. Circuit, in conflict with three other courts of appeals, correctly held that there is a “direct effect” in the United States under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act when the plaintiffs alleged loss flowed through three foreign companies and two countries before being booked in the United States. 2. Whether the D.C. Circuit, in conflict with four other courts of appeals, correctly held that there is a “direct effect” in the United States under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act when the legally significant act causing the effect occurred overseas. (i)