Taian Insurance Co., Ltd. v. Bondex Logistics Co., Ltd.
- Ho
- 1:24-cv-02650
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Taian Insurance v. Bondex Logistics, Judge Ho granted Taian’s request to postpone the initial pretrial conference after Bondex failed to appear.
Taian Insurance Co., Ltd. must serve the order on Bondex Logistics Co., Ltd. and, if Bondex does not appear, move for a default judgment by June 12, 2024. The initial pretrial conference was rescheduled for June 26, 2024.
What happened
Taian Insurance Co., Ltd. sued Bondex Logistics Co., Ltd. over alleged shortages in shipments of televisions transported from Vietnam to Texas. Taian said it had insured the cargo, paid its insured’s claim, and acquired the right to seek recovery from Bondex.
Taian reported that Bondex had not appeared, and the clerk entered a certificate of default. Taian asked to postpone the initial pretrial conference and said it planned to seek a judgment based on Bondex’s failure to defend.
Judge Ho granted the request in part by moving the conference from May 29 to June 26, 2024. The order required Taian to serve the order on Bondex and directed Taian to seek a default judgment by June 12 if Bondex did not appear.
The detailed version
- Taian Insurance Co., Ltd. v. Bondex Logistics Co., Ltd. · No. 1:24-cv-02650
- Ho
- May 20, 2024
Background
Taian Insurance Co., Ltd. brought this subrogation action against Bondex Logistics Co., Ltd. concerning containerized shipments of Vizio LCD televisions transported from Vietnam to Dallas, Texas, in April and May 2023. Taian alleged that the shipments arrived with shortages and that Bondex was liable for the losses. Taian stated that it had insured the cargo, paid the claim submitted by its insured, and thereby became subrogated to the insured’s rights to seek recovery from Bondex.
Taian asserted that the action involved maritime and admiralty claims under multimodal or “through” bills of lading issued by Bondex, which Taian described as a foreign non-vessel-operating common carrier. Taian also asserted that federal subject-matter jurisdiction and venue in the Southern District of New York were proper. The opinion does not decide those issues.
Request to Postpone the Conference
Taian informed the court that Bondex had failed to appear or defend the action. Taian stated that it served the summons and complaint on Bondex’s designated legal agent on April 12, 2024, and that Bondex’s deadline to answer or otherwise respond was May 3, 2024. The clerk entered a certificate of default against Bondex on May 16, 2024.
Taian asked to adjourn the initial pretrial conference, which was scheduled for May 29, 2024, and stated that it intended to move for a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b).
Ruling
The court granted the application. It adjourned the initial pretrial conference from May 29, 2024, to June 26, 2024, at 3:30 p.m. If Bondex appeared, the parties were required to file a joint status letter and proposed case management plan by June 12, 2024. If Bondex did not appear, Taian was required to move for a default judgment by June 12, 2024.
The court also ordered Taian to serve the order on Bondex by Federal Express and file proof of service by May 21, 2024. The court directed Taian to include in any default-judgment motion a description of its efforts to provide Bondex with actual notice of the lawsuit. The order addressed scheduling and next steps; it did not decide whether Bondex was liable for the alleged shipment losses or whether Taian was entitled to a default judgment.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.