SAN FRANCISCO — A two-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 30 denied an emergency motion to stay discovery filed by California residents and businesses who are accused of receiving assets from a business currently involved in an arbitration proceeding and trial, both in China, to avoid its assets being frozen by a Chinese court (HRC-Hainan Holding Co., LLC, et al. v. Yihan Hu, et al., No. 20-15371, 9th Cir.).
MIAMI — A woman who was injured during a cruise ship excursion and her husband filed an amended notice of appeal to the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 23 after a Florida federal judge issued an order that, in part, denied their motion to intervene in a lawsuit brought by the tourist attraction where she was injured against its insurer seeking a declaration that arbitration in Hong Kong is not required (Rain Forest Adventures (Holdings) Ltd., et al. v. AIG Insurance Hong Kong Ltd., No. 19-23698, S.D. Fla., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46738).
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on March 27 granted a motion to dismiss a petition to confirm an arbitral award issued against investors in a Chilean winery, holding that although the court had personal jurisdiction over the parties and the Panama Convention did not provide relief from enforcement, the petition was time-barred because a tolling agreement reached between the parties was invalid under New York law (EGI-VSR LLC v. Huber, et al., No. 19-6099, S.D. N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54405).
MIAMI — A federal judge in Florida on March 30 denied as moot a motion to reconsider a magistrate judge’s order denying a motion for attorney fees as “premature” because the magistrate judge subsequently issued an order on a motion to compel giving a pineapple company the opportunity to submit an application for its expenses (Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical INPROTSA, S.A. v. Del Monte International GmbH, No. 16-24275, S.D. Fla.).
MIAMI — A federal judge in Florida on March 24 issued a second order administratively closing a case concerning a $14,829,243 arbitral award issued for an Australian environmental services firm, after the plaintiffs notified the court that the parties have executed a confidential settlement, but some conditions for dismissal have not yet been fulfilled and they are awaiting the appointment of a representative for a deceased defendant (Cardno International PTY, Ltd., et al. v. Carlos Diego Fernando Jácome Merino, et al., No. 17-23964, S.D. Fla.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Republic of Kazakhstan on March 23 petitioned the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for a rehearing en banc in its appeal of a trial court’s decision to affirm an arbitral award against it, arguing that the D.C. Circuit created a circuit split with its ruling that Kazakhstan forfeited an argument on appeal by failing to file a motion to amend with the proposed amended complaint attached (Republic of Kazakhstan v. Anatolie Stati, et al., No. 19-7038, D.C. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and its state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A (PDVSA) on Feb. 19 asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that allowed the attachment of PDVSA’s assets to enforce a federal judgment against Venezuela to satisfy an arbitral award (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., v. Crystallex International Corporation, No. 19-1049, U.S. Sup.).
MIAMI — A pineapple company does need to provide evidence of its sales or actual damages in a dispute over a pineapple seed agreement as it is not arguing that it lost sales as a result of the pineapple grower’s alleged breach of the agreement, a federal magistrate judge in Florida wrote in an order issued March 10, denying a motion to compel discovery and a motion to compel production of actual damages (Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical INPROTSA, S.A. v. Del Monte International GmbH, No. 16-24275, S.D. Fla.).
OKLAHOMA CITY — A $1.75 million arbitral award, plus interest, issued to an Italian investor should be enforced, the investor asserts in a Feb. 21 complaint filed in Oklahoma federal court (Luisa Todini v. Victoria Time Corporation, No. 20-151, W.D. Okla.).
BALTIMORE — A federal judge in Maryland in an opinion filed Feb. 24 granted a petition to enforce an arbitral award against a Maryland resident related to a Chinese real estate arbitration dispute, holding that the respondent’s previous offer to tender payment through a Chinese mainland bank, which the Hong Kong-based petitioner cannot legally accept, did not moot petitioner’s claim for relief, and disagreed with arguments that enforcing the award would violate comity (Estate of Ke Zhengguang v. Yu Naifen Stephany, No. 18-3546, D. Md., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30619).
HOUSTON — A federal judge in Texas on March 12 granted a Russian oil company’s motion to dismiss a petition to confirm a $70 million arbitral award against it for the liquidation of a joint venture to develop oil fields, holding that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case showing that minimum contacts existed for the court to exercise jurisdiction over the Russian company (First National Petroleum Corporation v. OAO Tyumenneftegaz, No. 19-97, S.D. Texas, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42864).
By Lisa Houssiere and Cecilia Ibarra-van Oostenrijk
By Mark Mangan, Lukas Lim and Daniel Gaw
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on March 5 entered judgment confirming a final award of $2,172,833,761.15 plus post-judgment interest and approved a stipulation prohibiting the petitioner from seeking enforcement in connection with a separate litigation the respondent, a bankrupt Guernsey entity, is pursuing against financier George Soros and other parties for fraud (Vale S.A. v. BSG Resources Limited, No. 19-3619, S.D. N.Y.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three agricultural companies on March 4 filed a petition in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to confirm an arbitral award against Hungary of 7,148,824 euros plus costs, fees and interest issued in 2019 for the expropriation of leasing rights to land in northwestern Hungary (Magyar Farming Company Ltd., et al. v. Hungary, No. 20-0637, D. D.C.).
WICHITA, Kan. — A Singapore company engaged in the business of trading fertilizer products says in a March 3 motion to confirm an arbitration award that a Kansas federal court should enforce the award entered in its favor because the court has personal jurisdiction and because the parties agreed that any arbitration award would be final and binding on the parties (Dreymoor Fertilizers Overseas PTE Ltd. v. AVAgro LL,C et al., D. Kan., No. 20-105).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Republic of Guatemala in a March 17 corrected appellant brief asked the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse and vacate a district court’s rulings in an arbitral dispute, including its final judgment confirming an arbitral award worth approximately $35 million, which Guatemala asserts was annulled (TECO Guatemala Holdings, LLC v. Republic of Guatemala, No. 19-7153, D.C. Cir.).
SAN DIEGO — A Canadian construction company on March 12 submitted a bill of costs and moved for attorney fees and post-judgment interest after a federal judge in California granted its petition to confirm two partially paid arbitration awards against a Canadian holding company and its director in a dispute over the sale of the construction company (Pacer Construction Holdings Corporation v. Richard Pelletier, et al., No. 19-1263, S.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35328).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal judge in the District of Columbia on March 6 issued two separate orders, one directing a company awarded more than $35 million in an international arbitration dispute with the Republic of Guatemala to provide the country with the necessary information for it to arrange payment and the other denying Guatemala’s request for a stay (TECO Guatemala Holdings, LLC v. Republic of Guatemala, No. 17-102, D. D.C.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Two Swedish men and their companies failed to show that they were denied fair and equitable treatment or that they were denied full protection and security after their alcohol businesses in Romania allegedly suffered when taxes were increased, the black market grew and Romania engaged in enforcement actions in which the men and businesses did not agree, an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes tribunal ruled in a March 5 award, adding that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction over another claim by the same parties concerning a mineral water contract (Mr. Ioan Micula, et al. and Romania, No. ARB/14/29, ICSID).