The Court of Appeals held that it had jurisdiction over the appeal against the order by which, in the context of an enforcement petition, the district court had directed Nigeria to present all its defenses – both jurisdictional (including the defense of immunity) and merits – in a single response. The Court explained that the order was appealable under the collateral-order doctrine, and rejected the contention that the Court nonetheless lacked jurisdiction because the state’s underlying assertion of immunity was not colorable as both the arbitration exception and the waiver exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) applied. The Court found instead that the state had at least a colorable argument that an award set aside by a court with supervisory jurisdiction could not be a basis for the arbitration exception, pursuant to Art. V(1)(e) of the 1958 New York Convention.