In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, 392 F.Supp.2d 539 (2005) 10 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 789 reconsideration of those decisions. Plaintiffs’ view, the subject matter jurisdiction question must be resolved before the Court addresses personal jurisdiction. See Reiss v. Societe Centrale Du Groupe Des Assurances Nationales, 235 F.3d 738, 746 (2d Cir.2000) (“The initial question to be answered in this case is not A Stanilari whether there is personal jurisdiction within the meaning . Standar i i 44] 45] A motion for reconsideration is appropriate where or the Nuokdiction within the meanine of the Pst} Ps a court overlooks “controlling decisions Or factual matters Plaintiffs submit that it would be inefficient to separate that were put before it on the underlying motion ... and the personal jurisdiction discovery from the FSIA which, had they been considered, fight have reasonably discovery since the two inquiries are related. Finally, altered the result before the court.” Range Road Music, Plaintiffs argue that the Court’s rulings on the other Saudi Inc. v. Music Sales Corp., 90 F.Supp.2d 390, 392 banks’ Rule 12(b)(6) motions cannot apply to NCB So 555, 557 2 ae oe oe v. = : Kr oe Inc., 70 because the allegations against the various banks are not : ; ir. ) (‘The standard for granting a identical. motion [for reconsideration] is strict, and ... will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling In Bush, following the Supreme Court’s instructions in decisions or data that the court BNET GONE: ). A motion Steel Co., the district court dismissed the case for lack of for reconsideration may also be pented to “correct a clear subject matter jurisdiction after finding plaintiffs lacked enor or prevent manifest injustice.” Doe v. New York City standing to sue. On appeal, the Second Circuit found the Dep't of Soc. Servs., 709 F.2d 782, 789 (2d Cir. 1983). case “exceptional,” because twelve years earlier it had “entertained and rejected, on the merits, the