Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. The Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel

Filing 28

MOTION for preliminary injunction by Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Von Spiegelfeld, Allen)

Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. The Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel

Doc. 28

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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, SHIPWRECKED 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.

PLAINTIFF' S MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Plaintiff, Odyssey Marine Exploration,
Inc. (" Odyssey

), by its

undersigned

counsel , hereby moves for entry of an Order granting a preliminary injunction temporarily

enjoining and prohibiting any third parties from conducting search and/or recovery operations or
conducting activities that would disturb the Defendant Site in any manner 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 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 2 of 18

point coordinates of which have been provided to the Court under seal (hereinafter referred to as
the "Defendant

Site

). Plaintiff

warrants to the Court that it shall monitor evidence of activity

related to the Defendant Site and give notice of the Order to any third party coming within the
area of the Defendant Site.

The grounds supporting this motion are set forth in the accompanYIng
memorandum of law, which is incorporated herein by reference.
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 [phone]
Facsimile: (813) 229- 8313

Attorneys for Plaintiff

/:

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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, appurtenances and cargo located within a five mile radius ofthe center point coordinates provided to the Court under seal
Defendant; in rem
and

The Kingdom of Spain
Claimant.

PLAINTIFF' S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Plaintiff, Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. (" Odyssey ), by its
undersigned counsel ,

respectfully submits this memorandum of law in support of its

motion for entry of an Order granting a preliminar injunction temporarily enjoining and prohibiting any third parties from conducting search and/or recovery operations or
conducting activities that would disturb the Defendant Site in any manner 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 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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

sovereign nation. The Defendant Site s position is located within a five mile radius of the
center point coordinates which have been provided to the Court under seal. Upon

infonnation 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 arrest.

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. At
the time of filing of this Amended Complaint , Odyssey stil has not recovered evidence

which would confinn the existence of a paricular ship, or in fact , any ship at all.
When Odyssey first filed the initial Complaint , it had surveyed the
Defendant Site and had begun an archaeological pre-disturbance survey 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 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 5 of 18

infonnation and precise positioning infonnation. Odyssey has since completed the
survey and the photomosaic image of the Defendant Site.

Odyssey subsequently recovered additional artifacts from the Defendant
Site which are undergoing conservation according to strict archaeological protocols.

Odyssey has prepared a Preliminary Site Assessment (hereinafter PSA" ) regarding the

Defendant Site and the arifacts recovered and wil present that to the Court under seal.
Odyssey has fied 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

date from the subject Defendant Site confinns an interest in the artifacts of any third
pary including the Kingdom of Spain. Odyssey is prepared to release certain

infonnation from the PSA as directed by the Court to Claimant, Spain. When and if
Odyssey discovers evidence which confinns that the Defendant Site is that of a particular
shipwreck , Odyssey wil properly give notice to any third party 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 planing
the archaeological recovery of the artifacts from the Defendant Site.
Odyssey, its agents and associates, have been actively, voluntarily and

successfully engaged in the process of reducing arifacts from the Defendant Site to the
Plaintiffs exclusive custody, possession,

dominion and control, as circumstances pennit

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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 artifacts from this and other sites has been the

subject of intense international media attention especially in Spain. Many Spanish media
reports have been filled with inaccuracies including false claims that artifacts were

recovered ilegally from Spanish terrtorial waters. As a result ofthe 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 depart 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. Stemm, Odyssey s Cofounder, explaining
Odyssey s actions and the facts surrounding the arrest, 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

infonnation regarding its recovery to Spanish officials, and despite the assurance ofthe
Spanish criminal judge (Judge Juan Jose Navas Blanquez sitting in substitution of the

Judge for the Number Three First Instance and Preliminary Investigating Court of La
Linea de la Concepcion and district 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 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 7 of 18

of the 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 Spanish
media to the boarding and seizure, Spanish authorities paraded the
coastline for photograph and video opportnities.
Ocean Alert

along the

Additionally, despite her protests

officials seized the personal computer of one of Odyssey s attorneys, Marie Rogers, and
ilegally copied

all attorney/client privileged infonnation regarding Odyssey and other

clients. As of the date of this Amended Complaint, the computer has been returned
without the hard drive. The original hard drive and copy are retained in the custody of the
court. A fonnal 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 ofthe laptop.
Once in Algeciras, Odyssey s crew and attorneys were forced by the

Spanish officials 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 oftheir 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 seizure by Spain. Odyssey s rights granted
by this Court to continue its recovery have been restricted by Spain, and Odyssey
damages as a result of Spain s conduct are extensive.
II.

STANDARD FOR GRANTING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
In this Circuit, the four requirements for awarding preliminary injunctive

relief are:

);

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 8 of 18

(1)

a substantial likelihood that the party requesting relief wil ultimately succeed on the merits;

(2)

the pary requesting relief wil suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not issued;
that threatened injury to the moving party outweighs hann to the opposing party; and
the injunction, if issued, wil not be adverse to the public interest.

(3)

(4)
See Siegel v.

Lepore 234 F. 3d 1163 (11th Cir. 2000), Haitian Refugee Center, Inc.
1555 , 1561-62

Nelson 872 F. 2d
States v.

(11 th Cir. 1989),

aff'

498 U. S. 479 (1991);
1986),

United
479 U.S. 1085

Alabama 791 F.2d 1450, 1459 n. 10

(11 th Cir.

cert. denied

(1987).

As set forth below, Odyssey satisfies each of these four requirements.

Therefore , an award of a preliminary 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 maritime claims under the
law of salvage and the law of finds. 1
Regardless of

which legal theory is ultimately

As a case involving an admiralty and maritime claim, this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter pursuant to the Constitution of the United States Aricle III, Section 2, Clause 1 28 U. c. 9 1333 , and Rule 9(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Claims arising out of salvage operations are unquestionably within the admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts. v. See Treasure Salvors, Inc. Unidentifed Wrecked and Abandoned Sailng Vessel 640 F.2d 560 566- 67 (5 Cir. 1981) (Treasure Salvors III). Furthennore, U.S. admiralty courts unquestionably have jurisdiction to
adjudicate salvage claims based on salvage operations that occur on the high seas.

See

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 occurrences on the terrtorial waters the United States. Treasure Salvors 1 569 F.2d at 334 ("the presence of the res within the district is not an absolute prerequisite to the court' s jurisdiction. ). It is common for

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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 quantum 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 maritime law of finds gives title to a person who has reduced to
possession an object which has been abandoned at sea.

See Columbus-America

Discovery Group

v.

The Unidentifed,

Wrecked and Abandoned Sailing Vessel 974 F.2d

450 (4

h Cir. 1992),

cert. denied 507 U. S. 1000 (1993). This doctrine 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

h Cir. 1978) Wrecked and Abandoned Sailing Vessel 569 F.2d 330 337 (5

(Treasure
Wrecked

Salvors

1);

Martha s Vineyard Scuba Headquarters, Inc.
1059 , 1065 (1
st Cir. 1987);

v.

The Unidentifed,

and Abandoned Vessel 833 F. 2d
The CHINA

Indian River Recovery

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 (7th Cir. 1992). Under the facts ofthis case, there is

a substantial likelihood that Odyssey wil be able to prove that the Defendant Site has
in rem jurisdiction over shipwrecks located in international S. admiralty courts to assert v. Unidentifed See Marex waters and even within the terrtorial seas of foreign nations. MS. Titanic Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel 952 F. Supp. 825 , 828 (S.D. Ga. 1997); Bemis Inc. v. The Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel 924 F. Supp. 714 (E.D. Va. 1996); h Cir. 1996), D. Va. 1995), aff' 99 F. 3d 1129 (4 S. Lusitania, 884 F. Supp. 1042 (E. cert. denied 118 S. Ct. 1558 (1998).

,"
Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP Document 28 Filed 08/07/2007 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 confinn the existence of a particular 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 arifacts 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

artifacts recovered have been abandoned and award title to Odyssey under the maritime
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 property that is lost at sea but has

not been abandoned by its original owner. The law of salvage grants a liberal reward to

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 property could not have been rescued without the assistance ofthe salvor; service voluntarily rendered when not required as a pre-existing duty; and
success , in whole or in part, of recovery of the imperilled property.
Treasure Salvors, Inc. v.

(2)

(3)

See The SABINE 101 U. S. 384 (1879);
Wrecked and Abandoned Sailng Vessel

The Unidentifed,
546 F. Supp. 919

Nuestra Senora de Atocha

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 11 of 18

930 (S. D. Fla. 1981)
1974)).

(citing Legnos

v.

M/W Olga Jacob 498 F.2d 666 669 (5

h 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 of the law.

The Defendant Site Is In Marne Peril
A marine peril "includes more than the threat of stonn, fire or piracy to a

vessel in navigation.

Treasure Salvors 1

569

F.2d at 337. The concept of marine peril

also includes property which is discovered after being long lost but is "still in peril of being lost through actions of the elements.
Id. See also Platoro
Ltd., Inc.

Unidentifed Remains 614 F.2d 1051 (5 h Cir. 1980);

Fort Myers Shell

Dredging Co.

Barge NBC512 404 F.2d 137 , 139 (5 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 artifacts with " grab buckets " and without
regard to archaeological protocols or proper conservation techniques. Thus , the

Defendant Site satisfies the definition of marine peril because it is " stil

in peril of

being

lost through actions ofthe elements. See Treasure Salvors 1

569

F.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
voluntarily rendering service to rescue the Defendant Site from being lost forever through
the action of the elements in the sea and

from the possibility that the artifacts wil

be

hastily recovered by salvors without regard for the Defendant Site s historic and

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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 Part,

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, wiling 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 artifacts from the Defendant

Site which may prove helpful in identifyng a paricular shipwreck. Odyssey has taken
constructive possession of the wreck site to the extent its age, depth and historical

significance pennit. Accordingly, Odyssey is substantially likely to succeed in
recovering the imperiled property, and it has satisfied the final element of a successful
salvage claim.

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 oftheir

location,

disposition, and character--

Plaintiff would assert that such would be irrelevant with respect to the Defendant Site.

As was already discussed, all current 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 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 13 of 18

jettisoned property 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

event , Claimant Spain could never satisfy the maritime law s stringent standard for an

effective and proper refusal of salvage, insofar as (1) it is not in actual possession of the
Defendant Site, (2) a prudent mariner would not refuse salvage under circumstances such

as this, (3) Plaintiff acted in good faith to recover property and investigated the origin of

property; and (4) in any event, a party purporting to disclaim salvage may only do so for
its property and not for that owned by other paries. See
Wrecking Co. v. United States, Merritt

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 property 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

MS.

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 occurrng 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 of24 nautical miles. See United States v.

Hidalgo-Gato 703 F. 2d

1267

(11

h Cir. 1983). Even in a nation s contiguous zone, a coastal state s competence is

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 14 of 18

limited. See

United States

v.

McRary,

665 F.2d 674, 677 n.4 (5 h 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 sanitary 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. Odyssey wil file under seal 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
coastline , and is thus not within any nation s terrtorial sea or contiguous
zone.

Odyssey Wil Suffer Irreparable Iniury If Iniunctive Relief Is 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 hann and injury to Odyssey for which there would be no adequate
remedy at law.

See Treasure Salvors

546 F. Supp. at 929;

Deep Sea Research, Inc.
aff'

The Brother Jonathan 883 F. Supp. 1343 1362 (N. D. Cal. 1995),
Cir. 1997),

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 rights. Among the most important of these rights are the right to exclude others from participating in the salvage

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 15 of 18

operations, so long as the original salvor appears ready, willng and able to complete the salvage project, and the right to possession of the salved property, a right exclusive even ofthe owner, until such time as the salvage lien on the property 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 preliminary injunctive relief. Consequently, the Court
should enter a preliminary injunction protecting Odyssey s continued right to exclusive

possession of the Defendant Site, and protecting it from interference from rival salvors.
Odyssey s Potential Iniurv Outweighs The Iniury Of Any Other Party

Odyssey is the only party which has expended any resources in the search

for and recovery ofthe 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 confinn the interest of any third party to the Defendant Site or to
the artifacts recovered therefrom. Odyssey is not aware of any other party, including

fishennen , 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 party, since Odyssey wil suffer serious irreparable injury if an injunction is not
issued , and it is unlikely that any other party wil suffer injury if preliminary injunctive

relief is awarded to Odyssey.

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 16 of 18

An Iniunction Wil Not Be Adverse To The Public Interest
Odyssey is committed to recovering the Defendant Site in a manner that

benefits the public interest. The recovery operation and artifact preservation has been

and wil continue to be conducted in accordance with strct archaeological protocols.

Furhennore , 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 contrary, the issuance of a preliminary injunction pennitting Odyssey to conduct a
competent , safe, scientific and successful recovery ofthe 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 preliminary injunction temporarily enjoining and prohibiting any third parties from conducting search and/or recovery
operations or conducting activities that would disturb the Defendant Site in any manner

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 28

Filed 08/07/2007

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~fowlerwhite. com FOWLER WHITE BOGGS BANKER P. O. Box 1438 Tampa , Florida 33601 [phone]
Facsimile: (813) 229- 8313

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 8:07-cv-00614-SCB-MAP

Document 28

Filed 08/07/2007

Page 18 of 18

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 6, 2007,
I electronically filed the

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system
notice of electronic filing to James A. Goold, Covington

which wil send a
1201

Burling LLP,

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~fow lerwhite. com FOWLER WHITE BOGGS BANKER P. O. Box 1438 Tampa, Florida 33601 [phone]
Facsimile: (813) 229- 8313

Attorneys for Plaintiff