Gulf Marine Fabricators, LP v. The ATP Innovator et al
Filing
128
ORDER ON MOTION TO INTERVENE re 39 , 72 , 96 . (Signed by Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos) Parties notified.(amireles, 2)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
GULF MARINE FABRICATORS, LP,
Plaintiff,
VS.
THE ATP INNOVATOR, et al,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
June 26, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-00430
ORDER ON MOTION TO INTERVENE
ASRC Energy Services Omega, LLC’s (Omega’s) motions to intervene (D.E. 39,
72) were previously denied, pending a ruling on vessel status. D.E. 56, 74. In its
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (D.E. 122) issued May 30, 2018, this Court
held that the ATP INNOVATOR is a vessel. Moreover, the ATP INNOVATOR was
sold at public auction pursuant to Admiralty Rule E(9) and the proceeds of the sale are
currently on deposit in the registry of the Court, less any amount disbursed to date as
custodia legis expenses. D.E. 95, 121, 126.
According to the parties’ Joint Advisory Status Report (D.E. 96), Omega
continues to seek intervention and Plaintiff, Gulf Marine Fabricators, LP is not opposed
to that intervention.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the Court
reconsiders Omega’s motions (D.E. 39, 72, 96) and GRANTS Omega leave to intervene
in this action for the purpose of pursuing its claim to the remaining proceeds of the sale
of the ATP INNOVATOR as alleged holder of a promissory note executed by Blue Sky
Langsa, Ltd. and Amerindo Services, Ltd. and secured by the ATP INNOVATOR. As
1/2
indicated in the Joint Advisory (D.E. 96), Omega shall not include its claims under the
Louisiana Oil Well Lien Act.
ORDERED this 26th day of June, 2018.
___________________________________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2/2
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?