In the Matter of the Complaint Ocean Angel V, LLC

Filing 48

Order Directing Plaintiff-in-Limitation to Post Bond. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 6/7/2021. (ejdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/7/2021)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 9 Case No. 5:19-cv-02794-EJD IN RE THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT OF OCEAN ANGEL V, LLC ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF-INLIMITATION TO POST BOND 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 On May 22, 2019, Plaintiff-in-Limitation Ocean Angel V, LLC (“Ocean Angel”) filed this 14 action in admiralty for exoneration from or limitation of liability. Dkt. No. 1. At that time, Ocean 15 Angel filed an ad interim stipulation of value for $50,000. Dkt. No. 3-3. On March 10, 2021, the 16 Court granted Claimant Robin DeLeon-Piedra’s motion to increase the limitation fund to 17 $1,105,000.00. Dkt. No. 36. De-Leon Piedra moves to compliance with the Court’s March 10, 18 2021 order. Dkt. No. 39. 19 46 U.S.C. § 30511 of the Limitation of Liability Act provides that a vessel owner who has 20 brought a civil action for limitation of liability in district court shall either (at the owner’s option): 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (1) deposit with the court, for the benefit of claimants — (A) an amount equal to the value of the owner’s interest in the vessel and pending freight, or approved security; and (B) an amount, or approved security, that the court may fix from time to time as necessary to carry out this chapter; or (2) transfer to a trustee appointed by the court, for the benefit of claimants — (A) the owner’s interest in the vessel and pending freight; and Case No.: 5:19-cv-02794-EJD ORDER TO POST BOND 1 1 (B) an amount, or approved security, that the court may fix from time to time as necessary to carry out this chapter. 2 3 Id. § 30511(b). Consistent with § 30511, Supplemental Admiralty Rule F of the Federal Rules of 4 Civil Procedure provides that: 5 [t]he owner (a) shall deposit with the court, for the benefit of claimants, a sum equal to the amount or value of the owner’s interest in the vessel and pending freight, or approved security therefor, and in addition such sums, or approved security therefor, as the court may from time to time fix as necessary to carry out the provisions of the statutes as amended . . . . The plaintiff shall also give security for costs and, if the plaintiff elects to give security, for interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum from the date of the security. 6 7 8 9 Fed. R. Civ. P. Suppl. AMC Rule F(1) (emphasis added). To date, Ocean Angel has not deposited 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 any security with the Court but instead has only filed an updated ad interim stipulation of value for 12 $1,055,000, which it contends moots DeLeon-Piedra’s motion to compel. Dkt. Nos. 40, 41. 13 DeLeon-Piedra asserts that her motion to compel is not moot, as Ocean Angel has not deposited 14 any security with the Court or posted a bond. Dkt. No. 47. Ocean Angel’s updated ad interim stipulation of value states that it agrees “[t]o abide by all 15 16 orders of the Court” and “[u]pon demand, to cause to be filed a bond in form and sufficiency of 17 surety satisfactory to this Court . . . .” Dkt. No. 40 ¶ 2. The Court construes DeLeon-Piedra’s 18 motion and statement concerning that motion as such a demand. Accordingly, the Court 19 ORDERS Ocean Angel to deposit with the Clerk of the Court a bond in the amount of 20 $1,105,000.001 by June 21, 2021. IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 Dated: June 7, 2021 23 EDWARD J. DAVILA United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28 The Court’s March 10, 2021 order increased the preexisting $50,000 limitation fund by $1,055,000 to a total fund amount of $1,105,000. Ocean Angel’s updated ad interim stipulation incorrectly lists $1,055,000 as the total amount. Compare Dkt. No. 36 at 9 with Dkt. No. 40 at 1. 1 Case No.: 5:19-cv-02794-EJD ORDER TO POST BOND 2

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?