Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc. v. Tecnologias Relacionadas con Energia y Servicios Especializados, S.A. de C.V. et al
Plaintiff: Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc.
Defendant: Tecnologias Relacionadas con Energia y Servicios Especializados, S.A. de C.V. and Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V.
Case Number: 1:2017cv09873
Filed: December 18, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge: Katherine Polk Failla
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
October 22, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 114 ORDER: Accordingly, Mr. Savitt is hereby TERMINATED as counsel of record for Ardica. This leaves Ardica without counsel of record in this matter and deprives Plaintiff of the ability to pursue post-judgment discovery, as is their right. To remedy t his situation, the Court ORDERS Ardica to notify the Court of its new counsel of record in this matter on or before November 23, 2020; and to respond to Plaintiffs post-judgment discovery requests, which the Court finds to have been properly served on it, on or before December 7, 2020. If Ardica fails to comply, the Court will consider the imposition of sanctions. As outgoing counsel in this matter, Mr. Savitt is directed to convey this Order to Ardica. Attorney Ephraim Savitt terminated. (Responses due by 12/7/2020). (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 10/22/2020) (nb)
July 21, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 104 FINAL JUDGMENT Based on the July 10, 2020 Opinion and Order of this Court granting summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc. ("Dan-Bunkering"), it is hereby: ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff Dan-Bunk ering have judgment against Defendant Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V., for the principal amount of $570,586.00, together with interest at 9% from July 1, 2017 through July 21, 2020, calculated at the rate of 9% per annum pursuant t o N.Y. CPLR §§ 5001 and 5004, amounting to $157,012.76, (daily interest of $140.69 for 1116 days) for a total judgment in the amount of $727,598.76 plus costs and disbursements allowable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Judgment signed this 21st day of July, 2020 in New York, New York. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 7/21/2020) (kv)
July 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 102 OPINION AND ORDER re: 91 MOTION for Summary Judgment Exhibits filed by Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V., 84 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc., 88 MOTION for Summary Judgment < i> filed by Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V. For the reasons explained above, Dan-Bunkering's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and Ardica's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Dan-Bunkering is hereby ORDERED to submit a proposed final judgment on or before July 24, 2020. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at docket entries 84, 88, and 91. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 7/10/2020) (rro)
February 18, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 100 ORDER granting 98 Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application GRANTED. The Court will accept Defendant Ardica's late filing. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 2/18/2020) (mro)
January 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 83 ORDER granting 82 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. Application GRANTED. Plaintiff's counsel may have the same extension. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 1/10/2020) (rro)
April 26, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 50 OPINION AND ORDER re: 46 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Opposing Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses filed by Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V., 36 MOTION to Strike Defendant Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V.'s First, Second, and Third Affirmative Defenses filed by Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc. For the reasons set forth above, Ardica's motion to dismiss is DENIED. Dan-Bunkering's motion to strike is DENI ED as to Plaintiffs affirmative defense of lack of subject matter jurisdiction and GRANTED in all other respects. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at docket entries 36 and 46. The parties are hereby ORDERED to submit a proposed Case Management Plan for the Court's consideration on or before May 15, 2019. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 4/26/2019) (rro)
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc. v. Tecnologias Relacionadas con Energia y Servicios Especializados, S.A. de C.V. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dan-Bunkering (America), Inc.
Represented By: Emily Anna Beer
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: Tecnologias Relacionadas con Energia y Servicios Especializados, S.A. de C.V.
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: Ardica Construcciones, S.A. de C.V.
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?