Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. The Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel
Filing
23
MOTION for preliminary injunction by Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Von Spiegelfeld, Allen) Modified on 8/8/2007 (jlh, ). TERMED; REFILED AT DOC 28
/:
Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. The Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel
Doc. 23
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 1 of 18
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Tampa Division In Admiralty
ODYSSEY MARINE EXPLORATION , INC.
Plaintiff
CIVIL ACTION
Case No: 8:07-CV-00614-SCB-MAP
THE UNIDENTIFIED, SHIPWRCKED VESSEL if any, its apparel, tackle, appurtenances and cargo located within a five mile radius of the center point coordinates provided to the Court under seal
Defendant; in rem
and
The Kingdom of Spain
Claimant and Defendant.
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR .ORDER
GRATING PRELIMINARY INJUCTIVE RELIEF
Plaintiff,
Odyssey
Marne Exploration,
Inc. (" Odyssey
), by its undersigned
injunction temporarly
counsel , hereby moves for entr of an Order
granting a preliminar
enjoining and prohibiting any third parties from conducting search and/or recovery operations or conducting activities that would disturb the Defendant Site in any maner or that would interfere
with Odyssey s exclusive rights to recover the Defendant Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel if
any, its apparel, tackle, appurtenances and cargo located within a five mile radius of the center
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 2 of 18
point coordinates of which have been provided to the Court under seal (hereinafter referred to as
the "Defendant
Site
). Plaintiff
warants to the Court that it shall monitor evidence of activity
coming within the
related to the Defendant Site and give notice of the Order to any third part
area of the Defendant Site.
The grounds supporting this motion are set forth in the accompanymg
memorandum of law, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Respectfully submitted
Dated:
August 6, 2007
s/ Allen von Sviegelfeld Allen von Spiegelfeld - FBN 256803 avonsp fowlerwhite. com Eric C. Thiel- FBN 016267 ethiel fowlerwhite. com FOWLER WHITE BOGGS BANKER P. O. Box 1438 Tampa, Florida 33601 (813) 228-7411
Facsimile: (813) 229- 8313
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 3 of 18
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Tampa Division In Admiralty
ODYSSEY MARINE EXPLORATION, INC.
Plaintiff
CIVIL ACTION
: Case No: 8:07-CV-00614-SCB-MAP
THE UNIDENTIFIED, SHIPWRECKED VESSEL if any, its apparel, tackle, appurenances and cargo located within a five mile radius of the center point coordinates provided to the Court under seal
Defendant;
mrem
and
The Kingdom of Spain
Claimant and Defendant.
PLAINTIFF' OF LA WIN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR ORDER GRATING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIV RELIEF
S MEMORADUM
Plaintiff, Odyssey Marne Exploration, Inc. (" Odyssey ), by its
undersigned counsel ,
respectfully submits this memorandum oflaw in support of its
a preliminar injunction temporarily enjoining and
or
motion for entr
of an Order granting
prohibiting any third paries from conducting search and/or recovery operations
conducting activities that would disturb the Defendant Site in any maner or that would
interfere with Odyssey s exclusive rights to recover the Defendant Unidentified
Shipwrecked Vessel, if any, its apparel, tackle, appurtenances and cargo located with a
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 4 of 18
five mile radius of the center point coordinates of which have been provided to the Court
under seal (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Site
BACKGROUND
The Defendant Site rests on the sea floor in the Atlantic Ocean at a depth
of approximately 1100 meters,
beyond the terrtorial waters or contiguous zone of any
s position is located within a five mile radius ofthe
sovereign nation. The Defendant Site
center point coordinates which have been provided to the Court under seal. Upon
information and belief, no other salvor is currently working on the Defendant Site.
Odyssey does not have any specific knowledge of any archaeological or salvage
operations other than those by Odyssey which have been conducted on the Defendant
Site or in the general area, and to the best of Odyssey s knowledge, no salvor has sought
to protect an interest in the Defendant Site through an arest.
Odyssey first located the Defendant Site in March, 2007 using
sophisticated sonar and magnetometer equipment. At the time of filing of the initial
Complaint , Odyssey had not discovered evidence of a ship, but based upon its research, it
believed that the vessel associated with the wreck site was a nineteenth century ship.
the time of fiing of this Amended Complaint, Odyssey stil has not recovered evidence
which would confirm the existence of a paricular ship, or in fact, any ship at all.
When Odyssey first fied the initial Complaint, it had surveyed the
Defendant Site and had begu an archaeological
pre-disturbance
surey taking video and
photographs in order to create a photomosaic image of the Defendant Site, using a
surface-controlled remotely operated vehicle ("ROV"). Odyssey placed an array of 5
acoustic beacons on towers around the Defendant Site to provide navigational
,"
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 5 of 18
information and precise positioning information. Odyssey has since completed the
survey and the photomosaic image of the Defendant Site.
Odyssey subsequently recovered additional arifacts
Site which are undergoing conservation according to strct
from the
Defendant
archaeological protocols.
Odyssey has prepared a Preliminary Site Assessment (hereinafter PSA") regarding the
Defendant Site and the artifacts recovered and wil present that to the Court under seal.
Odyssey has filed a Motion for Protective Order which references the PSA and the need for assurance that the PSA wil
be kept confidential prior to filing.
Nothing recovered to
of any third
date from the subject Defendant Site confirms an interest in the arifacts
pary including the Kingdom of Spain. Odyssey is prepared to release certain
information from the PSA as directed by the Court to Claimant, Spain. When and if Odyssey discovers evidence which confirms that the Defendant Site is that of a paricular
shipwreck , Odyssey wil
properly give notice
to any third pary with a potential interest.
Odyssey s survey and recovery operation has been, and wil continue
, conducted in accordance with all appropriate archaeological protocols and under the
direction of an experienced nautical archaeologist.
Odyssey, its agents and associates, have invested substantial time, money
and effort in locating, surveying and photographing the Defendant Site, and in planning
the archaeological recovery of the arifacts from the Defendant Site.
Odyssey, its agents and associates, have been actively, voluntarly and
successfully engaged in the process of reducing arifacts from the Defendant Site to the
Plaintiffs exclusive custody, possession, dominion and control, as circumstances permit
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 6 of 18
and Odyssey has the present ability and intention to continue to do so during the
pendency of this action.
Odyssey s recovery of arifacts from this and other sites has been the
subject of intense international media attention especially in Spain. Many Spansh media
reports have been filled with inaccuracies including false claims that artifacts were
recovered ilegally from Spanish terrtorial waters. As a result of the false reports, and
despite Odyssey s continued assurance that no artifacts have been recovered anywhere
near Spanish terrtorial waters, Odyssey became the subject of a criminal investigation in
Spain. In fact, Odyssey became aware through the Spanish press that Spanish authorities
would intercept and inspect Odyssey
Explorer)
s vessels (the
Ocean Alert
and the
Odyssey
ifthey attempted to depar Gibraltar where they were docked. Odyssey
attorneys were denied access to the order, however, and were told that the order-was
secret. " Odyssey s attempts to appear in its defense were unsuccessful. Thus, Odyssey
prepared a Sworn Statement of Gregory P. Stem, Odyssey s Cofounder, explaining
Odyssey s actions and the facts surrounding the arest, the recovery, and the subsequent claims and baseless detention of Odyssey s ships by Spain. (A copy of the Sworn
Statement including all Exhibits was attached to the Amended Complaint).
Despite the fact that Odyssey provided the Sworn Statement and further
information regarding its recovery to Spanish officials, and despite the assurance of the
Spansh criminal judge (Judge Juan Jose Navas Blanquez sitting in substitution of the
Judge for the Number Thee First Instance and Preliminar Investigating Cour of La Linea de la Concepcion and distrct a different
judge from the one who signed the
original "secret order ), that Odyssey s vessels would not be boarded without the consent
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 7 of 18
ofthe Master or forcibly taken to a Spanish port, on July 12 2007 , while Odyssey was
moving its vessel the Ocean Alert
from Gibraltar, and while the vessel was in
international waters, Spain boarded the vessel under protest from the Master and ilegally
seized the vessel forcing it into the Spanish port of Algeciras. Having alerted the Spansh
media to the boarding and seizure, Spanish authorities paraded the
coastlne for photograph and
video opportities.
Ocean Alert
along the
Additionally, despite her protests
officials seized the personal computer of one of Odyssey s attorneys, Marie Rogers, and
illegally copied all attorney/client privileged information regarding Odyssey and other
clients. As of the date of
this Amended Complaint, the computer has been retued
without the hard drive. The original hard drive and copy are retained in the custody of the
cour. A formal
complaint and request for the return of the hard drive and all copies
taken has been made to the court and is currently pending decision by the Judge as to the
legitimacy of the seizure of the laptop.
Once in Algeciras, Odyssey s crew and attorneys were forced by the
Spanish offcials to sit in the scalding sun for approximately seven hours without food or
water or use of the restroom. Their passports were taken (but returned later that day) as
were all of their electronic equipment (of which the hard drives have been removed and
only the empty laptops returned). The Odyssey Explorer
remains blockaded in Gibraltar
by virte of the criminal order and threatened seizue by Spain. Odyssey s rights granted
by this Cour to continue its recovery have been restricted by Spain, and Odyssey
damages as a result of Spain s conduct are extensive.
11.
STANDARD FOR GRANTING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
In this Circuit, the four requirements for awarding preliminar injunctive
relief are:
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 8 of 18
(1)
a substantial likelihood that the par requesting relief wil ultimately succeed on the merits;
the par requesting relief wil suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not issued;
(2)
(3)
that threatened injury to the moving part opposing par; and
outweighs
har to the
(4)
See Siegel v. Lepore,
the injunction, if issued, wil not be adverse to the public interest.
234 F.3d 1163 (1Ith Cir. 2000); Haitian Refugee Center, Inc.
Nelson 872 F.2d
States v.
1555 , 1561-62 (11
791 F.2d 1450,
th Cir. 1989),
aff'
(11
498 U. S. 479 (1991);
United
Alabama
1459 n. 10
th Cir. 1986),
cert. denied 479 U. S. 1085
(1987).
As set forth below, Odyssey satisfies each ofthese four requirements.
Therefore , an award of a preliminar injunctive relief is appropriate in this matter.
III.
ARGUMENT
There Is A Substantial Likelihood That Odyssey Wil Ultimately Succeed
On
The Merits Of Its Claims
This is a salvage case involving admiralty and martime claims under the.
law of salvage and the law of finds.
Regardless of which legal theory is ultimately
As a case involving an admiralty and martime claim, this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter pursuant to the Constitution ofthe United States III Section 2, Clause 1 28 U. C. 1333 , and Rule 9(h) of the Federal Rules of Aricle Civil Procedure. Claims arsing out of salvage operations are unquestionably within the v. See Treasure Salvors, Inc. Unidentifed, admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts. th Cir. 1981) (Treasure Wrecked and Abandoned Sailng Vessel 640 F.2d 560 566- 67 (5 Salvors III). Furthermore, U. S. admiralty courts unquestionably have jurisdiction to See adjudicate salvage claims based on salvage operations that occur on the high seas. Treasure Salvors 111 640 F.2d at 566-67 ("The subject matter jurisdiction thus granted is not limited to causes of action arsing from acts or occurences on the terrtorial waters of res within the United States. Treasure Salvors 1 569 F.2d at 334 ("the presence of the the distrct is not an absolute prerequisite to the court' s jurisdiction. ). It is common for
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 9 of 18
found to apply to the case, there is a substantial likelihood that Odyssey wil
ultimately
succeed on the merits of either or both of its claims or under its claim for equitable relief
based on quantu meruit and unjust enrchment.
There Is A Substantial Likelihood That Odyssey Wil Ultimately Succeed
On The Merits Of Its Claim Under The Law Of Finds
The martime law of finds gives title to a person who has reduced to
possession an object which has been abandoned at sea.
See Columbus-America
Vessel
Discovery Group
v.
The Unidentifed, Wrecked and Abandoned Sailng
974 F.2d
450 (4
th Cir. 1992),
cert. denied 507 U. S. 1000 (1993). This doctrne has been
consistently recognized in admiralty, and courts have awarded title to shipwrecks to the
finder when warranted by the facts. See Treasure Salvors, Inc. v.
The Unidentifed,
Wrecked and Abandoned Sailng Vessel 569 F.2d 330, 337 (5
th Cir. 1978)
(Treasure
Wrecked
Salvors I); Martha s Vineyard Scuba Headquarters, Inc.
and Abandoned Vessel
833 F.2d 1059, 1065 (1
st Cir. 1987);
v.
The Unidentifed,
Indian River Recovery
. The CHINA 645 F. Supp. 141 (D. Del. 1986).
A finding of abandonment may be inferred from all of the relevant facts
and circumstances, and may be based on circumstantial evidence.
Zych v.
Unidentifed,
Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel Believed to be the LADY ELGIN 755 F. Supp. 213 , 214
(N. D. Ill. 1991),
aff'
960 F .2d 665 (7
th Cir. 1992). Under the facts ofthis case, there is
a substantial likelihood that Odyssey wil be able to prove that the Defendant Site has
S. admiralty cours to assert in rem jurisdiction over shipwrecks located in international See Marex v. Unidentifed waters and even within the terrtorial seas of foreign nations. 952 F. Supp. 825 828 (S.D. Ga. 1997); MS. Titanic, Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel Bemis Inc. v. The Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel 924 F. Supp. 714 (E.D. Va. 1996); aff' 99 F.3d 1129 (4 th Cir. 1996), S. Lusitania, 884 F. Supp. 1042 (E.D. Va. 1995), cert. denied 118 S. Ct. 1558 (1998).
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 10 of 18
been abandoned by its original owner. The Defendant Site is located beyond the
terrtorial waters or contiguous zone of any sovereign nation. The Defendant Site has
revealed no evidence which would confirm the existence of a paricular ship or of any
ship at all. The arifacts recovered have similarly failed to provide evidence which would
suggest anything other than an abandonment. In fact, it is possible that the artifacts were
tossed overboard from a ship, as jettison. See
(D. P. a 1806) (No. 13
Taylor
v.
The CATO 23 F. Cas. 752 , 753
786). Thus, the Court should find that the Defendant Site and the
arifacts recovered have been abandoned and award title to Odyssey under the martime
law of finds.
There Is A Substantial Likelihood That Odyssey Wil Ultimately
Succeed On The Merits Of Its Claim Under The Law Of Salvage
The common law of salvage applies to propert that is lost at sea but has
not been abandoned by its original owner. The law of salvage grants a liberal reward
those who voluntarly engage in efforts to save a vessel in peril at sea, and it promotes the
orderly recovery of such property.
See The BLACKWALL 77 U. S. 1 (1869). It is well
recognized that three elements must be established in order to present a salvage claim:
(1)
a marine peril from which the propert could rescued without the assistance of the salvor;
not
have been
(2)
service voluntarly rendered when not required as a pre-existing duty; and
success , in whole or in par, of recovery of the imperilled propert.
Treasure Salvors, Inc.
v.
(3)
See The SABINE 101 U. S. 384 (1879);
Wrecked and Abandoned Sailng Vessel
The Unidentifed
Nuestra Senora de Atocha
546 F. Supp. 919
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 11 of 18
930 (S.D. Fla. 1981)
1974)).
(citing Legnos
v.
MIW Olga Jacob 498 F.2d 666 669 (5 th Cir.
Odyssey s activities with respect to the Defendant Site satisfy all three of
these elements, and therefore is a salvage operation within the meaning ofthe law.
The Defendant Site Is In Marne Peril
A marne peril "includes more than the threat of storm, fire or piracy to a
vessel in navigation.
Treasure Salvors 1
569
F.2d at 337. The concept of marine peril
also includes propert which is discovered after being long lost but is " stil in peril of
being lost through actions of the elements.
Id. See also Platoro Ltd.,
Inc.
Unidentifed Remains 614 F.2d 1051 (5 th Cir. 1980);
Barge NBC512
404 F.2d 137 ,
Fort Myers Shell
Dredging Co.
139 (5
th Cir. 1968) (the "peril required in salvage service
need not necessarly be one of imminent or absolute danger, either presently or
reasonably to be apprehended. ). The Defendant Site is in danger from rival salvors who
may attempt to locate it and recover remaining arifacts with " grab buckets " and without
regard to archaeological protocols or proper conservation techniques. Thus, the
Defendant Site satisfies the definition of marne peril because it is " stil
in peril of
being
lost through actions ofthe elements. See Treasure Salvors 1
569
2d at 337.
Odyssey Is Voluntarily Rendering Service When Not Required As A
Pre- Existing Duty
Odyssey is under no duty to recover the Defendant Site. Instead, it is
voluntarly rendering service
to rescue the Defendant Site from being lost forever through
and
the action of the elements in the sea
from the possibility that the arifacts wil be
hastily recovered by salvors without regard for the Defendant Site s historic and
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 12 of 18
archaeological value. Accordingly, Odyssey has satisfied the second element of a
salvage claim.
Odyssey Is Substantially Likely To Succeed, In Whole Or In Par,
In Recovering The Imperiled Property
Odyssey has already demonstrated that it is capable of finding, surveying
and photographing a large wreck site beneath 1100 meters depth or deeper. Odyssey is
ready, willing and able to continue its recovery operations. Moreover, Odyssey has the
equipment , manpower and experience required to successfully complete archaeological
recovery operations.
Odyssey desires to search for and recover arifacts
from the
Defendant
Site which may prove helpful in identifying a particular shipwreck. Odyssey has taken
constrctive possession of
the wreck site to the extent its age, depth and historical
significance permit. Accordingly, Odyssey is substantially likely to succeed in
recovering the imperiled propert,
salvage claim.
and
it has satisfied the final element of a successful
Any Assertion By Spain Or Any Other Potential Claimant That It
Has Successfully Refused Salvage Would Be Irrelevant.
Insofar as Spain may assert that it has properly refused salvage for all
Spanish shipwreck-sites -- irrespective of their location, disposition, and character-Plaintiff would assert that such would be irrelevant with respect to the Defendant Site.
As was already discussed, all curent evidence from the Defendant Site suggests that
there is, in fact, no remains of a ship to be found. In fact, the cargo may have been
voluntarly jettisoned. As the U. S.
Supreme Court has held, in such circumstances
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 13 of 18
jettisoned propert is subject to a claim by a successful salvor, and no attempt at refusal
of salvage would be valid. See
The ELIZA LINES 199 U. S. 119, 133-34 (1905). In any
law s strngent standard for an
event , Claimant Spain could never satisfy the martime
effective and proper refusal of salvage, insofar as (1) it is not in actual possession of the
Defendant Site, (2) a prudent marner would not refuse salvage under circumstances such
as this, (3) Plaintiff acted in good faith to recover propert
propert; and (4)
and
investigated the origin of
in any event, a pary purporting to disclaim salvage may only do so for
Merritt
its property and not for that owned by other paries. See
Wrecking Co. v. United States,
Chapman Derrick &
274 U. S. 611 , 613 (1927);
Tidewater Salvage, Inc.
Weyerhaeuser Co.,
633 F.2d 1304 , 1307 (9th Cir.1980). Courts have made it a legal
presumption that owners of propert lost at sea desire to have their property salvaged
and the burden would necessarily rest on a party to conclusively prove that they had
effectively refused salvage services. See S. Titanic, Inc. v.
Haver 171 F.3d 943 , 963
(4th Cir. 1999).
Defendant Site is Located Beyond the Terrtorial Sea or Contiguous
Zone of any Nation.
No nation may interfere with shipwreck recovery activities, unless such
are occurng within that nation s terrtorial sea or contiguous
zone. A nation
s terrtorial
sea is measured from the shoreline (or baselines along the coast) out to a maximum of 12
nautical miles. A nation s contiguous zone is (as the name implies) contiguous with a
terrtorial sea, and extends out a maximum of an additional 12 nautical miles, making for
a total maximum of 24 nautical miles. See
(11 th Cir.
United States v.
Hidalgo-Gato,
703 F .2d 1267
1983). Even in a nation s contiguous zone, a coastal state s competence is
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 14 of 18
limited. See
United States
v.
McRary,
665 F.2d 674, 677 n.4 (5 th Cir. Unit B 1982) ("the
control of the United States over foreign boats in the contiguous zone is limited to the
enforcement of customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitar
regulations.
The Defendant Site is not located within the terrtorial
sea or contiguous zone of
any nation. Plaintiffs have already filed with this Court, under seal, coordinates of the
area in which the Defendant Site is located. Filed with this Motion, under seal, is a
nautical chart depicting the location of the site described in the subject Amended
Complaint. It is undisputed that the Defendant Site is not located within 24 nautical
miles of any nation s coastline, and is thus not within any nation
contiguous zone.
s terrtorial sea or
Odyssey Wil Suffer Irreparable
Iniury IfIniunctive ReliefIs Not Issued
Odyssey has expended considerable resources in locating, studying and
surveying the Defendant Site, in photographing and documenting the Defendant Site, and
in developing an archaeological excavation and conservation plan as well as in
recovering the arifacts and in preserving their historical value. Odyssey has committed
its financial resources, time, manpower, equipment and its vessels to these efforts. To
allow others to come in at this time and reap the benefits of Odyssey s labor would
constitute irreparable harm and injur
remedy at law.
to Odyssey for which there would be no adequate
546 F. Supp. at 929; Deep Sea Research, Inc.
See Treasure Salvors
The Brother Jonathan
Cir. 1997),
883 F. Supp. 1343 ,
1362 (N.D. Cal. 1995),
aff'
102 F.3d 379 (9
aff' d in part, vacated in part and remanded 118 S. Ct. 144 (1998).
As the Fifth Circuit explained in
Treasure Salvors III:
A salvor. . . has a valuable interest in his salvage operations which the law protects by vesting in the salvor certain
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 15 of 18
rights. Among the most important of these rights are the right to exclude others from paricipating in the salvage operations , so long as the original salvor appears ready, wiling and able to complete the salvage project, and the right to possession of the salved propert, a right exclusive even of the owner, until such time as the salvage lien on the propert is extinguished or adequate security for this obligation is given.
640 F.2d at 567.
Odyssey risks violation of its legal rights and substantial investment to
date if the Court does not award preliminar injunctive relief. Consequently, the Cour
should enter a preliminar injunction protecting Odyssey s continued right to exclusive
possession of the Defendant Site, and protecting it from interference from rival salvors.
Odyssey s Potential Iniur
Outweighs The Iniur
Of Any Other Party
Odyssey is the only par which has expended any resources in the search
for and recovery of the Defendant Site. Further, the Defendant Site is located beyond the
terrtorial waters or
contiguous zone of any sovereign nation. There is no evidence
currently which would confirm the interest of any third pary to the Defendant Site or to
the arifacts rec(wered therefrom. Odyssey is not aware of any other par, inCluding
fishermen , salvors, divers or others that may have discovered or recovered items from the
Defendant Site, that has sought a salvage claim, or that has attempted to reduce the
Defendant Site to its possession.
Consequently, Odyssey s potential injury outweighs the injury of any
other par, since Odyssey wil suffer serious irreparable injury if an injunction is not
issued , and it is unlikely that any other part
relief is awarded to Odyssey.
wil
suffer injury if preliminary injunctive
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 16 of 18
An Injunction Wil Not Be Adverse To The Public Interest
Odyssey is committed to recovering the Defendant Site in a maner that
benefits the public interest. The recovery operation and arifact preservation has been
and will continue to be conducted in accordance with strct
archaeological protocols.
Furthermore , Odyssey intends to make certain of the recovered arifacts
available for
public display and educational purposes as well as historic and scientific study.
Consequently, the issuance of an injunction wil not be adverse to the public interest. To
the contrar, the issuance of a
preliminar injunction permitting Odyssey to conduct a
competent , safe, scientific and successful recovery of the Defendant Site can only benefit
the public interest.
See Treasure Salvors
546 F. Supp. at 929.
IV.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Odyssey respectfully requests that the Court
grant its motion for entry of an Order granting a preliminar injunction temporarily
enjoining and prohibiting any third paries from conducting search and/or recovery
operations or conducting activities that would distub the Defendant Site in any maner
or that would interfere with Odyssey s exclusive rights to salvage the Defendant Site within the areas described in the Complaint.
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 17 of 18
Respectfully submitted
Dated:
August 6, 2007
s/ Allen von Spiegelfeld Allen von Spiegelfeld - FBN 256803 avonsp~fowlerwhite. com Eric C. Thiel- FBN 016267 ethiel~fow lerwhite.com FOWLER WHITE BOGGS BANKER P. O. Box 1438 Tampa , Florida 33601 (813) 228-7411
Facsimile: (813) 229- 8313
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP
Document 23
Filed 08/06/2007
Page 18 of 18
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August
, 2007, I electronically filed
the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which wil send a
notice of electronic filing to James A. Goold, Covington
Burling LLP,
1201
Pennsylvania Ave. , NW, Washington, DC 20004, Attorneys for Claimant, Kingdom of
Spain.
s/ Allen von Spiegelfeld Allen von Spiegelfeld - FBN 256803 avonsp~fowlerwhite. com Eric C. Thiel- FBN 016267 ethiel~fowlerwhite. com FOWLER WHITE BOGGS BANKER P. O. Box 1438 Tampa , Florida 33601 (813) 228-7411
Facsimile: (813) 229- 8313
Attorneys for Plaintiff
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?