that the “‘better reading’” of the statute’s purpose, ibid., is to foster compliance with the United States’ international obligations, then the Court would affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. Elahi’s attachment of the Cubic Judgment does not hinder the U. S. Government’s efforts to comply with its obligations under the Algiers Accords. At Algiers, the United States agreed to “arrange ... for the transfer to Iran of all Iranian properties” located in the United States. 20 I. L. M., at 227, ¶ 9. That is not an obligation to pay Iran money, as the Court seems to believe. See ante, at 384. It is instead an obligation to take specific action in regard to specific properties. These specific properties do not include the Cubic Judgment — as the Court concedes. See ante, at 376 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, Elahi’s attachment of the Cubic
holding that the cubic judgment was not blocked holding that the governments restraining order against a blocked asset obtained prior to the entry of a civil judgment unblocked it for tria purposes holding that notice of judgment was insufficient holding the judgment premature citing one case holding the judgment void and another holding the judgment irregular holding that the rule 12b6 ruling was not a final judgment and did not bind the district court at summary judgment