Young Poong USA Corporation v. Young Poong Paper Manufacturing Company LTD
Plaintiff: Young Poong USA Corporation
Defendant: Young Poong Paper Manufacturing Company Limited
Case Number: 2:2017cv02434
Filed: July 20, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Deborah M Fine
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Deborah M. Fine 32 is accepted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for default judgment (Docs. 19 , 28 ) be granted, that judgment be awa rded against Defendant on Count I, breach of contract (December 2015 Agreement) and Count II, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (December 2015 Agreement), and that judgment on Counts I and II be entered in the amount of $1,732,426.70 USD (2,000,000,000 KRW), together with statutory interest of $236,370.72 USD for the period between February 1, 2017 and June 14, 2018; and that judgment also be entered against Defendant on Count III, breach of contract ( 2010 Supply Agreement) and Count IV, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (2010 Supply Agreement), and that judgment on Counts III and IV be entered in the amount of $148,713.29 USD, together with statutory interest o f $17,884.86 USD. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff be awarded prejudgment interest accruing at a daily rate of $474.64 USD for each day after June 14, 2018 until the date of judgment on the judgment awarded for Counts I and II; and tha t Plaintiff be awarded prejudgment interest accruing at a daily rate of $40.74 USD for each day after June 14, 2018 until the date of judgment on the judgment awarded for Counts III and IV. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion f or attorneys' fees (Doc. 20 ) and amended/supplemental motion for attorneys' fees (Doc. 29 ) each be granted and that judgment be entered against Defendant for reasonable attorneys' fees in the amount of $39,112.20 USD. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against Defendant for costs incurred in this matter, totaling $513.88 USD. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff be awarded post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court enter judgment in accordance with this Order and terminate this case. Signed by Senior Judge Stephen M McNamee on 8/30/2018. (REK)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Young Poong USA Corporation v. Young Poong Paper Manufacturing Company LTD
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Young Poong USA Corporation
Represented By: Daniel S Ho
Represented By: Jennifer Soo Jung Lee-Cota
Represented By: Bruce Edward Samuels
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Young Poong Paper Manufacturing Company Limited
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?