Maritima Petroleo E Engenharia LTDA v. Ocean Rig 1 As
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
Defendants, Ocean Rig 1 AS and Ocean Rig 2 AS (hereinafter “Ocean Rig” or “defendants”), move pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rules 12(b)(1) and (6) to dismiss the complaint and to vacate the maritime attachment brought by plaintiff Marítima Petró-leo E Engenharia LTDA (hereinafter “Marítima” or “plaintiff’) on the grounds that: (1) there is no admiralty jurisdiction; (2) the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; (3) plaintiff has abused the attachment process; and (4) plaintiff has no need for security. Because this Court…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Jerome B. Grubart, Inc. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- American Dredging Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Kossick v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Foremost Insurance v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Sisson v. RubySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Dolco Investments, Ltd. v. Moonriver Development, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- Red River Holdings, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Smith v. MitlofDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Sea Transport Contractors, Ltd. v. Industries Chemiques Du SenegalDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- EFKO Food Ingredients Ltd. v. Pacific Inter-Link SDN BHDDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.