Kamaluddin Nabizada v. Marco Rubio et al. (United States District Court for the District of Columbia Civil Action No. 23-02906 (AHA))

Procedural record

1. 26 August 2026United States

   26 August 2026United States

   Memorandum Opinion of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Civil Action No. 23-02906 (AHA) dated 26 August 2026

   United States District Court for the District of Columbia

   Case no.

   23-02906 (AHA)

   Decision summary

   The court dismissed count one without prejudice, granted the government's motion for summary judgment on the remaining claims, and denied Nabizada's cross-motion for summary judgment. The court held that OFAC's designation and denial of reconsideration were supported by reasoned decisionmaking and that the disclosed unclassified information and in camera review satisfied due process requirements.

   Participants

   Kamaluddin Nabizada

   Marco Rubio

   United States District Court for the District of Columbia

   Judge

   Amir H. Ali

   Authorities cited

   26

   • International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. §§ 1701, 1702(a)(1)(B), 1702(c))
     statute
   • Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A))
     statute
   • Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, or Support Terrorism (Executive Order No. 13224, § 1(a)-(b) and appendix, 66 Fed. Reg. 49079 (23 September 2001))
     executive order
   • Modernizing Sanctions To Combat Terrorism (Executive Order No. 13886, § 1, 84 Fed. Reg. 48041 (9 September 2019))
     executive order
   • Treasury Department sanctions regulations (31 C.F.R. § 594.802)
     regulation
   • Global Terrorism Sanctions Regulations (31 C.F.R. §§ 594.201(a), 594.310; 68 Fed. Reg. 34196 (6 June 2003))
     regulation
   • Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations (31 C.F.R. § 501.807; 31 C.F.R. ch. V, app. A)
     regulation
   • Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d))
     rule
   • Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (607 U.S. 229, 237 (2026))
     case
   • Zevallos v. Obama (793 F.3d 106, 110 (D.C. Cir. 2015))
     case
   • Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (463 U.S. 29, 43, 52 (1983))
     case
   • AT&T Corp. v. FCC (349 F.3d 692, 698 (D.C. Cir. 2003))
     case
   • AT&T Corp. v. FCC (220 F.3d 607, 616 (D.C. Cir. 2000))
     case
   • Islamic American Relief Agency v. Gonzales (477 F.3d 728, 732, 734 (D.C. Cir. 2007))
     case
   • Dickson v. Secretary of Defense (68 F.3d 1396, 1404 (D.C. Cir. 1995))
     case
   • Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. (419 U.S. 281, 286 (1974))
     case
   • Kadi (42 F. Supp. 3d 1, 16-17 (D.D.C. 2014))
     case
   • Florida Gas Transmission Co. v. FERC (604 F.3d 636, 645 (D.C. Cir. 2010))
     case
   • Taylor v. Mills (892 F. Supp. 2d 124, 137-38 (D.D.C. 2012))
     case
   • Olenga (507 F. Supp. 3d 260, 272-73, 276 (D.D.C. 2020))
     case
   • National Council of Resistance of Iran v. Department of State (251 F.3d 192, 196, 208-09 (D.C. Cir. 2001))
     case
   • Mathews v. Eldridge (424 U.S. 319, 333, 335 (1976))
     case
   • People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran v. Department of State (327 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (D.C. Cir. 2003))
     case
   • Fares v. Smith (901 F.3d 315, 323-24 (D.C. Cir. 2018))
     case
   • Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development v. Ashcroft (333 F.3d 156, 163-64 (D.C. Cir. 2003))
     case
   • Kiareldeen v. Ashcroft (273 F.3d 542, 548 (3d Cir. 2001))
     case