STX Pan Ocean Co. Ltd. v. Dynamic Influence Shipping S.A. et al

Filing 33

ORDER of Dismissal with Prejudice and for Full Release of Security. Motions terminated: 32 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE AND FULL RELEASE OF SECURITY filed by Cido Holding Co, Dynamic Influence Shipping S.A., Cido Tanker Holding Company, Cido Shipping (H.K.) Co., Ltd.., ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 9/30/2014. (pjhlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2014)

Download PDF
Case4:13-cv-03691-PJH Document32 Filed09/29/14 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 JOHN D. GIFFIN, CASB No. 89608 john.giffin@kyl.com JENNIFER M. PORTER, CASB No. 261508 jennifer.porter@kyl.com JESSICA LUHRS, CASB No. 284846 Jessica.luhrs@kyl.com KEESAL, YOUNG & LOGAN A Professional Corporation 450 Pacific Ave. San Francisco, California 94133 Telephone: (415) 398-6000 Facsimile: (415) 981-0136 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff STX PAN OCEAN CO. LTD 8 9 10 Holland & Knight LLP 50 California Street, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 743-6900 Fax: (415) 743-6910 11 12 HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP Matthew P. Vafidis (California Bar # 103578) Adanna M. Love (California Bar # 280538) 50 California Street, Suite 2800 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: 415.743.6900 Facsimile: 415.743.6910 matthew.vafidis@hklaw.com adanna.love@hklaw.com 13 14 Attorneys for Defendants DYNAMIC INFLUENCE SHIPPING S.A.; CIDO TANKER HOLDING COMPANY; CIDO SHIPPING (HK) CO. LTD.; and CIDO HOLDING CO. 15 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 OAKLAND DIVISION 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 STX PAN OCEAN CO. LTD., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) DYNAMIC INFLUENCE SHIPPING S.A.; ) CIDO SHIPPING (HK) CO. LTD.; CIDO ) TANKER HOLDING COMPANY; and CIDO ) HOLDING CO., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) Case No.: CV-13-3691-PJH ORDER ON STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION, WITH PREJUDICE, BY PLAINTIFF; AND STIPULATION FOR AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR FULL RELEASE OF SECURITY Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Fed. R.Civ.P. 27 28 STIPULATION RE: DISMISSAL AND RELEASE OF SECURITY Case No.: CV-13-3691-PJH Case4:13-cv-03691-PJH Document32 Filed09/29/14 Page2 of 4 1 2 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff STX PAN OCEAN CO. LTD. ("Plaintiff") and Defendants DYNAMIC INFLUENCE SHIPPING S.A., CIDO SHIPPING (HK) 3 CO. LTD., CIDO TANKER HOLDING COMPANY, and CIDO HOLDING CO. (collectively 4 “Defendants”), and each of them, by and through their respective counsel of record, as follows: 5 WHEREAS, 6 1. This action was filed on August 8, 2013. 7 2. In its Verified Complaint herein, (Doc.#1), Plaintiff applied for a writ of maritime Asset Forfeiture Actions ("the Supplemental Rules") to attach the M.V. BUM EUN, then within this 10 district. On August 9, 2013, this Court issued an Order Authorizing Process of Maritime 11 Holland & Knight LLP attachment, pursuant to Rule B of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and 9 50 California Street, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 743-6900 Fax: (415) 743-6910 8 Attachment and Garnishment, Process of Maritime Attachment and Garnishment and an Order to 12 13 the U.S. Marshal Regarding Process of Maritime Attachment and, thereafter, the M.V. BUM EUN was seized or attached within this district, pursuant to Rule B and the said Orders. 3. 14 15 On August 16, 2013, Plaintiff and Defendants, by and through their respective counsel of record herein, filed a stipulation in this action agreeing, upon certain terms and conditions set forth therein, that, pursuant to Rule E(5)(a) of the Supplemental Rules, a deposit of 16 security may be made on behalf of Defendants in the amount of Thirty Million Dollars Only 17 18 19 ($30,000,000) to the Clerk of Court for deposit into the Court's registry, and that upon the giving of the said security, Plaintiff would immediately obtain the release of the M.V. BUM EUN from seizure without the necessity of any further order from this Court (Doc.#18.) 20 4. On August 16, 2013, in accordance with the Court's Order approving the said 21 stipulation, Defendants' counsel paid Thirty Million Dollars Only ($30,000,000), in the form of a 22 check drawn on its Client Trust Account, to the Clerk of Court for deposit into the Court's registry. 23 Thereafter, Plaintiff's counsel obtained the release of the M.V. BUM EUN from attachment. 24 5. In October 2013, Plaintiff commenced arbitration in London of the claims against 25 Defendants that are the subject of this action. On October 23, 2013, Plaintiff and Defendants 26 submitted a stipulation to this Court requesting an Order staying this action for a year (Doc. #26), 27 which order was granted by this Court on October 24, 2013 (Doc. #27.) 28 // -2STIPULATION RE: DISMISSAL AND RELEASE OF SECURITY Case No.: CV-13-3691-PJH Case4:13-cv-03691-PJH Document32 Filed09/29/14 Page3 of 4 1 2 6. On September 17, 2014, Plaintiff and Defendants, by and through their respective counsel of record, filed a stipulation, under the terms and conditions set forth therein, requesting an 3 Order for the partial release of the security, specifically that the Clerk of Court release from its 4 registry the amount of Five Million Dollars Only ($5,000,000), which Order was granted by this 5 Court on September 17, 2014 (Doc. #31.) 6 7. On September 24, 2014, Defendants' counsel received the funds released from the 7 Court's registry in the form of a check in the amount of Five Million Dollars Only ($5,000,000), and 8 submitted to the Court an acknowledgement of the receipt of the said payment. 8. 9 As of September 24, 2014, the amount of security deposited in the Court's registry in Holland & Knight LLP connection with this action was and is Twenty Five Million Dollars Only ($25,000,000), plus any 11 50 California Street, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 743-6900 Fax: (415) 743-6910 10 accrued interest. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that: 12 1. 13 14 15 Plaintiff and Defendants have concluded a full and final settlement of the disputes that are and were the subject of the arbitration in London and the subject of the Verified Complaint in this action. 2. Pursuant to the said settlement agreement, Plaintiff has agreed to dismiss this action 16 with prejudice and without award of costs or fees to any party. 17 18 19 3. without costs or fees to any party; Defendants, and each of them, hereby agree to the said dismissal of this action. 20 21 Accordingly, Plaintiff hereby voluntarily dismisses this action with prejudice, and 4. Said dismissal is made pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 22 5. Plaintiff and Defendants hereby jointly request an Order be issued by the Court that, 23 the Clerk of the Court be ordered to, and shall immediately, release the full amount of the security 24 held in the Court's registry, in the amount of Twenty Five Million Dollars Only ($25,000,000), plus 25 accrued interest, and that this sum be released to the law firm of Holland &Knight LLLP, in Trust, 26 on behalf of the Defendants and each of them. 27 // 28 // -3STIPULATION RE: DISMISSAL AND RELEASE OF SECURITY Case No.: CV-13-3691-PJH Case4:13-cv-03691-PJH Document32 Filed09/29/14 Page4 of 4 1 2 SO STIPULATED. Dated: September 29, 2014 KEESAL, YOUNG & LOGAN 3 /s/ Jessica Luhrs John Giffin Jessica Luhrs Attorneys for Plaintiff STX PAN OCEAN CO. LTD. 4 5 6 7 Dated: September 29, 2014 HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP 8 /s/ Matthew P. Vafidis Matthew P. Vafidis Adanna M. Love Attorneys for Defendants DYNAMIC INFLUENCE SHIPPING S.A., CIDO SHIPPING (HK) CO. LTD., CIDO TANKER HOLDING COMPANY, and CIDO HOLDING CO. 9 10 13 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, IT IS SO ORDERED. RT 19 ERED United IT IS SO ORD Judge States District NO 18 Dated: September 30 , 2014 hyllis Judge P ER A H 20 ton J. Hamil R NIA 17 ISTRIC ES D TC AT T FO 16 S 15 LI 14 UNIT ED Holland & Knight LLP 12 RT U O 50 California Street, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 743-6900 Fax: (415) 743-6910 11 N F D IS T IC T O R C 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4STIPULATION RE: DISMISSAL AND RELEASE OF SECURITY Case No.: CV-13-3691-PJH

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?