1. Lord Denning famously said: “As a moth is drawn to the light, so is a litigant drawn to the United States.” Smith Kline & French Labs. Ltd. v. Bloch, [1983] 2 All E.R. 72, 72 (Eng.

C.A. 1982). A foreign plaintiff’s preference for a United States forum rather than one in her home country draws from a number of strategic factors. The first is the perception that procedural opportunities in the United States, including discovery and class relief, make United States courts more plaintiff-friendly. The second is the view that civil justice is easier to finance in the United States because of the possibility of contingency fees to fund attorney representation. The third is the fact that United States law in some areas provides more generous avenues for relief. See Short, Is the Alien Tort Statute Sacrosanct? Retaining Forum Non Conveniens in Human Rights Litigation, 33 N.Y.U. J. Int’l L. & Pol.

1001 (2001); Weintraub, International Litigation and Forum Non Conveniens, 29 Tex. Int’l L.J. 321 (1994). How might changes in United States procedure, in terms of the tightening of pleading, discovery, and class action practice, be expected to influence plaintiff’s forum preference? See Robertson, Transnational Litigation and Institutional Choice, 51 B.C. L.

Rev. 1081 (2010).