Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft
- Gregory Woods
- 1:19-cv-05731
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft, Judge Woods adopted a report and denied Ocean Network Express’s motion to dismiss specified claims.
Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft and Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd.; the ruling allowed the claims identified in the claims spreadsheet to proceed past ONE’s motion to dismiss.
What happened
Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft involved claims against Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd., known as ONE. The parties agreed to use arguments from an earlier motion to address related “non-test” claims.
Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger recommended denying ONE’s motion to dismiss those claims. The parties filed objections to that recommendation.
Judge Gregory H. Woods adopted the report in full and denied ONE’s motion to dismiss the claims listed in the parties’ claims spreadsheet.
The detailed version
- Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft · No. 1:19-cv-05731
- Gregory Woods
- Apr. 22, 2022
Background
Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft, also identified as Hapag-Lloyd AG, brought this proceeding concerning the M/V Yantian Express. The order addressed a series of “non-test” claims against Ocean Network Express Pte. Ltd. (“ONE”). The parties agreed that the claims covered by ONE’s motion to dismiss were identified in a claims spreadsheet and that they would rely on arguments made during an earlier motion concerning “test” claims rather than submit new substantive briefing.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger recommended that the Court deny ONE’s motion to dismiss the non-test claims. The parties filed timely objections. Under the governing procedure, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The Court stated that it reviews properly specific objections independently and reviews general or repeated objections, and unobjected-to portions, for clear error.
Ruling
The Court adopted Judge Lehrburger’s report in full, incorporating the legal analysis from its November 29, 2021 opinion. It denied ONE’s motion to dismiss the claims identified in the claims spreadsheet. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 763.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.