Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

TRI MARINE INTERNATIONAL INC et al v. INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA et al

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
2:13-cv-05662 Search Pacer
Opposing Party: 
Tri Marine International Inc
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Central District of California
Date Filed: 
Aug 6 2013

"2. Plaintiffs assert that Tri Marine Spain, S.L. employee, Alfonso Beitia ("Beitia") stole millions of euros worth of property by diverting tuna from transportation to its final destination through fake sales to companies he owned or directly or indirectly controlled. The State Court Action alleges that the Marine Policy issued by UNA to Tri Marine, policy no. 494680, provides coverage for alleged losses Plaintiffs suffered when property was stolen by Beitia.

GROUNDS FOR REMOVAL - DIVERSITY
3. UNA was served with Plaintiffs' Summons and Complaint by service on its statutory agent on July 8, 2013. UNA has not filed any responsive pleadings in the State Court Action. As required by 28 USC § 1446 (b), this Notice of Removal is accordingly being filed with this Court "within thirty (30) days after receipt by the defendant, through service or otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which the State Court Action is based.

4. There is complete diversity of citizenship among and between the Plaintiffs on the one hand (Plaintiff Tri Marine International, Inc., a Washington corporation; Plaintiff Tri Marine International (pte), Ltd., a Singapore corporation; and Plaintiff Tri Marine Spain, S.L., a Spanish corporation) and Defendant UNA (a Pennsylvania corporation) on the other hand.

5. Plaintiff Tri Marine International, Inc. alleges in the State Court Action that it is a Washington corporation. See K 2 of Exhibit A.

6. Plaintiff Tri Marine International (pte), Ltd. alleges in the State Court Action that it is a Singapore corporation. See K 2 of Exhibit A.

7. Plaintiff Tri Marine Spain, S.L. alleges in the State Court Action that it is a Spanish corporation. See If 2 of Exhibit A.

8. Defendant UNA is a Pennsylvania corporation, with its principal offices in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. See ^f 3 of Exhibit A.

9. Plaintiffs are alleging damages in excess of $75,000. See f^f 1, 19, 20, and 21 of Exhibit A.

10. As demonstrated above, the District Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant

11. IINA will, upon filing of this Notice of Removal, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d) file a copy of the Notice of Removal with the Clerk of the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, and will serve a copy of same upon Plaintiffs.

CONCLUSION

12. IINA hereby asserts that this removal in no way constitutes: a waiver of any jurisdictional defenses to the claims of Plaintiffs; a waiver of any defense or contest to the validity and effectiveness of service of process upon IINA; a waiver of the statute of limitations defense; a waiver of the defense that IINA is not a proper party to this lawsuit or a waiver of any other defense or pleading challenges."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.