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)

Download PDF
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?