G.O. America Shipping Company, Inc. v. China Cosco Shipping Corporation Limited et al
Filing
11
REVISED ORDER AUTHORIZING RULE B ATTACHMENT OF ASSETS by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Writ of Attachment and Garnishment Pursuant to Rule B signed by Judge Martinez)(RS) certified copies to USMO
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON (SEATTLE)
IN ADMIRALTY
7
8
9
10
11
G.O. AMERICA SHIPPING COMPANY, INC., a
corporation registered in the Republic of the
Marshall Islands,
Plaintiff(s),
12
13
v.
14
CHINA COSCO SHIPPING CORPORATION
LIMITED, a company registered in the People
Republic of China,
15
16
17
18
Case No. 2:17-cv-00912-RSM
REVISED ORDER AUTHORIZING RULE B
ATTACHMENT OF ASSETS
COSCO SHIPPING LINES CO, Ltd. a subsidiary of
CHINA COSCO SHIPPING CORPORATION
LIMITED
19
21
CHINA SHIPPING INDUSTRY,
(Shanghai
Changxing) Co. Ltd., a subsidiary of CHINA COSCO
SHIPPING CORPORATION LIMITED
22
and
23
COSCO SHIPPING HEAVY INDUSTRY CO.,
subsidiaries of CHINA COSCO SHIPPING
CORPORATION LIMITED,
20
24
25
26
27
28
Defendant(s).
TO: The United States District Court Clerk’s Office; and
TO: China COSCO Shipping Corporation
29
30
31
32
THIS MATTER having come on by the motion of Plaintiff G.O. AMERICA SHIPPING COMPANY
INC. for an order authorizing attachment of Defendants’ assets located within this district, and having
considered the Verified Complaint in this action and the pleadings and files herein, the Court finds that the
REVISED ORDER AUTHORIZING RULE B ATTACHMENT OF ASSETS
PAGE 1 OF 3
CHUNG, MALHAS & MANTEL, PLLC
1511 Third Avenue, Suite 1088
Seattle, Washington 98101
Phone: (206) 264-8999 ♦ Facsimile (206) 264-9098
1
2
Plaintiff has a cause of action against the Defendants in the approximate amount alleged, and that the
Defendants cannot be found within this district, except that they possess assets within this district and within
3
4
5
the jurisdiction of this Court; therefore,
It is ORDERED that attachment of the following cargo vessels owned by COSCO Shipping Lines Co., Ltd.:
6
(1) COSCO Taicang that will arrive and dock at 4015 SR-509 North Frontage
Road; Tacoma Washington 1 on or around June 29, 2017;
7
8
(2) COSCO Europe will arrive and dock at 4015 SR-509 North Frontage Road
on or around July 4, 2017;
9
10
12
(3) COSCO Kaohsiung will arrive and dock at 4015 SR-509 North Frontage
Road; Tacoma Washington on or around July 10, 2017; it is scheduled to
depart July 11, 2017.
13
In addition to the above named vessels, Defendants are authorized to seize all cargo containers and funds
11
14
15
16
17
owned by any of the above named Defendants up to the amount $11,073,420 (USD). This order shall remain
in effect until further notice provided by this Court. Furthermore, all persons claiming any interest in the
same will be cited to appear and pursuant to Supplemental Admiralty Rule B answer the matters alleged in
18
19
the Complaint.
20
DONE IN OPEN COURT this 29th day of June 2017.
21
22
A
23
24
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
1
Although sailing schedule indicates Seattle, the Port of Seattle and the Port of Tacoma formed the Northwest Seaport Alliance in
2015. On information and belief the ships will be berthed at the Tacoma address at the dates delineated above.
REVISED ORDER AUTHORIZING RULE B ATTACHMENT OF ASSETS
PAGE 2 OF 3
CHUNG, MALHAS & MANTEL, PLLC
1511 Third Avenue, Suite 1088
Seattle, Washington 98101
Phone: (206) 264-8999 ♦ Facsimile (206) 264-9098
1
2
Presented by:
CHUNG, MALHAS & MANTEL, PLLC
3
4
5
/s/ Edward C. Chung
Edward C. Chung, WSBA# 34292
Attorney for Plaintiff
.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
REVISED ORDER AUTHORIZING RULE B ATTACHMENT OF ASSETS
PAGE 3 OF 3
CHUNG, MALHAS & MANTEL, PLLC
1511 Third Avenue, Suite 1088
Seattle, Washington 98101
Phone: (206) 264-8999 ♦ Facsimile (206) 264-9098
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?