Saint-Gobain Autover USA Inc. and related Saint-Gobain companies have recently filed a motion seeking an expedited discovery, with the aim of identifying Xinyi“s assets to obtain the approximately US…
Saint-Gobain Autover USA Inc. and related Saint-Gobain companies have recently filed a motion seeking an expedited discovery, with the aim of identifying Xinyi“s assets to obtain the approximately USD 24 million it is owed. According to the motion, Saint-Gobain Autover speaks of several alleged delays in the defendant“s attempts to pay the debt owed, since the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio ruled against it in November 2010, and determined the final judgment in April 2010 in the ongoing patent infringement suit. Xinyi requested (and was granted) an extension in April to secure financing for the debt owed to Saint-Gobain, which went until 31 May 2010. As the 31 May deadline approached, Xinyi filed a motion for the court to vacate or adjust the damages, or provide a new trial. According to Saint-Gobain, Xinyi also sought an extension so it could secure a Letter of Credit (LOC) – an extension that went until 15 June. On the day the agreed extension lapsed, 15 June, Xinyi informed Saint-Gobain that the Bank of China was apparently still reviewing the LOC, writes the company. Saint-Gobain was told that counsel would speak with Xinyi that evening due to the time difference. When Saint-Gobain asked again the following morning, they were told no conversation took place, this time due to a Chinese holiday. Saint-Gobain officials say they were informed that Xinyi and the Bank of China were still negotiating terms on the LOC on 22 June. Now that extended deadline has come and passed leaving Saint-Gobain with no security for its judgment, writes the company. Because we have now reached a point where Xinyi“s repeated assurances ring hollow, Saint-Gobain is compelled to move this Court for an order allowing expedited discovery in aid of execution on the Court“s judgment. In an effort to execute the judgment, Saint-Gobain says it has served focused discovery requests to identify Xinyi“s assets, but adds that it is subject to the ephemeral nature of [its] US assets. Among these, it highlights shipments of windshields and other glass parts throughout the US by Xinyi; and the money owed to Xinyi by its US customers. Because of Xinyi“s reluctance to provide financial data on customer sales during this litigation, Saint-Gobain does not have information on the amounts or location of Xinyi“s accounts receivable, writes the company. The company is therefore seeking information on Xinyi“s property in the US, accounts receivable owed by US companies to Xinyi and any of its US bank accounts. Xinyi has objected to the motion, saying that it has expended considerable time and effort to obtain the requisite security to stay execution of the judgment, also detailing the steps it has taken to secure a bond and/or a letter of credit. At the same time, Xinyi says that Saint-Gobain has patently misrepresented the scope of its proposed expedited discovery, and calls its discovery requests expansive and burdensome. Without good cause and without discovery appropriately narrow and tailored, Saint-Gobain has no basis upon which to deviate from the normal discovery procedures, writes Xinyi. Saint-Gobain has, however, replied to Xinyi“s objection, saying, Xinyi simply cannot offer any legitimate reason to explain why judgment was entered over 3.5 months ago, yet there is still no letter of credit or any indication of when, or if, one will be issued.