UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO: 21-23103-CV-BLOOM/OTAZO-REYES

CASA EXPRESS CORP. as Trustee of

CASA EXPRESS TRUST, 

Judgment Creditor, 

v. 

BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF

VENEZUELA,

 Judgment Debtor. 

______________________________________/ 

CASA EXPRESS CORP. as Trustee of

CASA EXPRESS TRUST, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

RAUL GORRIN BELISARIO, et al.,

Impleaded Defendants.

______________________________________/ 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION RE: D.E. 179 

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor Casa Express Corp. 

as Trustee of Casa Express Trust’s (“Casa Express” or “Casa”) Motion for Default Final Judgment 

against Impleaded Defendant Claudia Patricia Diaz Guillen (“Diaz Guillen”) (hereafter, “Motion 

for Default Final Judgment”) [D.E. 179]. This matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636 by the Honorable Beth Bloom, United States District Judge [D.E. 148]. 

For the reasons stated below, the undersigned respectfully recommends that Casa Express’

Motion for Default Final Judgment be GRANTED by the entry of default final judgment against 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 1 of 9
2 

Diaz Guillen in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On August 27, 2021, Casa Express commenced this action by registering an Amended 

Final Judgment issued by the Southern District of New York against Judgment Debtor

Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (“Judgment Debtor” or “Venezuela”) [D.E. 1]. On September 

10, 2021, Casa Express filed an Ex Parte Motion to Commence Proceedings Supplementary, to 

Implead Defendants, and for Issuance of Statutory Notices to Appear (hereafter, “Motion for 

Proceedings Supplementary”) [D.E. 3], which the Court granted on September 14, 2021 [D.E. 4]. 

Thereafter, the Court issued Statutory Notices to Appear directed at Impleaded Defendants 

Alejandro Andrade Cedeno (“Andrade Cedeno”) [D.E. 6]; Planet 2 Reaching, Inc., Posh 8 

Dynamic, Inc., RIM Group Investments Corp., RIM Group Investments I Corp., RIM Group 

Investments II Corp., and RIM Group Investments III Corp. (collectively, “Respondent Entities”) 

[D.E. 8–13]; and Raul Gorrin Belisario (“Gorrin”) [D.E. 15]. The Statutory Notices indicated that 

Casa Express seeks to satisfy the Amended Final Judgment in these proceedings supplementary, 

pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 56.29, by executing on eight properties variously titled in the Respondent 

Entities’ names (hereafter, “Properties”) [D.E. 6, 8–13, 15]. Casa Express had argued that “[s]ince 

misappropriated Venezuelan funds were used to acquire the [Properties], [they] are subject to a 

constructive trust in favor of Venezuela . . . [and] are subject to execution by Casa Express”. See

Motion for Proceedings Supplementary [D.E. 3 at 2]. A summons was also issued and served on 

Venezuela as the Judgment Debtor via diplomatic channels [D.E. 38–41]. 

On June 7, 2022, Casa Express filed a Motion for Leave to Amend by Interlineation the 

Motion for Proceedings Supplementary (hereafter, “Motion to Amend”) [D.E. 42], wherein Casa 

Express sought, in part, to amend the Motion for Proceedings Supplementary to implead Diaz 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 2 of 9
3 

Guillen. On September 2, 2022, the undersigned granted Casa Express’ Motion to Amend [D.E. 

59] and, that same day, Casa Express filed its Amended Motion for Proceedings Supplementary 

[D.E. 60]. On September 7, 2022, the Court granted Casa Express’ Amended Motion for 

Proceedings Supplementary [D.E. 62]; and issued Statutory Notices to Appear directed at Andrade 

Cedeno, the Respondent Entities, Gorrin, and Diaz Guillen [D.E. 63–69, 71–73, 76]. On January 

26, 2023, Casa Express moved for the entry of Clerk’s Default as to Diaz Guillen [D.E. 143]; and 

on February 7, 2023, a Clerk’s Default was entered against her [D.E. 153].1 

On April 14, 2023, Casa Express filed the instant Motion for Default Final Judgment 

against Diaz Guillen [D.E. 179] along with a proposed Default Final Judgment consisting of four 

sections, 1(a) through 1(d) [D.E. 179-3]. In its Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) certification, Casa Express 

represented that the Respondent Entities and Gorrin object to the relief sought by the Motion for 

Default Final Judgment. See Motion for Default Final Judgment [D.E. 179 at 7]. 

On May 16, 2023, the undersigned issued an Order to Show Cause requiring a showing of 

good cause in writing why the Motion for Default Final Judgment should not be granted or, in the 

alternative, requiring that responses in opposition to the Motion for Default Final Judgment be 

filed within twenty (20) days. See Order to Show Cause [D.E. 197]. Diaz Guillen did not respond 

to the Order to Show Cause. However, on June 5, 2023, the Respondent Entities and Gorrin

(hereafter, “Responding Defendants”) filed a Response to the Order to Show Cause (hereafter, 

“Response”) wherein they argued that the Motion for Default Final Judgment should be denied

because “it is procedurally improper under the Court’s Order on Default Judgment Procedure (D.E. 

115) and would lead to a likelihood of inconsistent verdicts given that the [‘]declaratory default 

1 A Clerk’s Default has also been entered against Venezuela [D.E. 112] and Andrade Cedeno [D.E. 113]. 

As further discussed below, Casa Express has separately moved for the entry of default final judgment 

against Venezuela and Andrade Cedeno [D.E. 149]. 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 3 of 9
4 

judgment’ sought by Casa, (D.E. 179-3), directly contradicts the [Responding Defendants’] 

affirmative defenses (D.E. 127).” See Response [D.E. 210 at 1]. On June 12, 2023, Casa Express 

filed its Reply to the Response (hereafter, “Reply”) [D.E. 212].

DISCUSSION

 The Responding Defendants concede that sections 1(a) and 1(b) of the proposed Default 

Final Judgment as to Diaz Guillen do not explicitly name or implicate them, see Response [D.E. 

210 at 2–3], and that section 1(c) is not directed at them, id. at 4. Moreover, the Responding 

Defendants do not assert any objections to section 1(d) of the proposed Default Final Judgment, 

which requests that the Court reserve jurisdiction “to award attorney’s fees and costs to Plaintiff 

against Venezuela after a final disposition on the merits of the case.” See Proposed Default Final 

Judgment [D.E. 179-3 at 4]. 

Nevertheless, the Responding Defendants argue that “to the extent [] sections [1(a) through 

1(c)] will be used by Casa as against [them] in any way, their entry at this point will lead to a 

likelihood of inconsistent verdicts since the [Responding Defendants] have raised [several] 

relevant and contradictory affirmative defenses.” See Response [D.E. 210 at 3–4]. 

In a Report and Recommendation on the Motion for Default Final Judgment against 

Andrade Cedeno and Venezuela [D.E. 149], the undersigned noted that “[t]he Responding 

Defendants [had] not assert[ed] any arguments as to Andrade Cedeno.” See Report and 

Recommendation [D.E. 198 at 4]. The undersigned further recounted that “[a]t the Hearing, 

following clarification from Casa Express as to the language of the proposed Default Final 

Judgment [D.E. 149-4], the Responding Defendants stated that they did not oppose the portions of 

the proposed Default Final Judgment pertaining to Andrade Cedeno”. Id. at 4–5. Thus, at the 

conclusion of the Hearing, the undersigned directed Casa Express to submit “a separate proposed 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 4 of 9
5 

Default Final Judgment as to Andrade Cedeno” that incorporated the unopposed portions of the 

proposed Default Final Judgment pertaining to him. Id. at 6. Upon Casa Express’ submission of 

the same [D.E. 196-1] and the Responding Defendants’ non-objection to it, the undersigned 

recommended that the Court enter the separate proposed Default Final Judgment as to Andrade 

Cedeno. See Report and Recommendation [D.E. 198 at 6] (attaching the recommended Default 

Final Judgment as to Andrade Cedeno at Exhibit B).

Diaz Guillen succeeded Andrade Cedeno as the Venezuelan National Treasurer. See

Amended Motion for Proceedings Supplementary [D.E. 60 at 7]. Thus, she is similarly situated 

as Andrade Cedeno. Moreover, the proposed Default Final Judgment as to Diaz Guillen is 

substantially identical to the recommended Default Final Judgment as to Andrade Cedeno to which 

the Responding Defendants did not object. Compare Proposed Default Final Judgment [D.E. 179-

3] with Exhibit B to Report and Recommendation [D.E. 198 at 11–13]. Therefore, the undersigned 

finds that, notwithstanding the Responding Defendants’ newly minted objections, entry of the 

proposed Default Final Judgment as to Diaz Guillen is appropriate. 

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing considerations, the undersigned respectfully recommends that Casa 

Express’ Motion for Default Final Judgment [D.E. 179] be GRANTED by the entry of default 

final judgment against Diaz Guillen in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Pursuant to Local Magistrate Judge Rule 4(b), the parties have fourteen days from the date 

of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections, if any, with the Honorable Beth 

Bloom, United States District Judge. Failure to file timely objections may bar the parties from 

attacking the factual findings contained herein on appeal. See Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Hallmark 

Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993). Further, “failure to object in accordance 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 5 of 9
6 

with the provisions of [28 U.S.C.] § 636(b)(1) waives the right to challenge on appeal the district 

court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions.” See 11th Cir. R. 3-1 (I.O.P. 

- 3). 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 26th day of June, 

2023. 

____________________________________ 

ALICIA M. OTAZO-REYES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

cc: United States District Judge Beth Bloom 

Counsel of Record 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 6 of 9
EXHIBIT A

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 1:21-cv-23103-BLOOM/OTAZO-REYES

CASA EXPRESS CORP, as Trustee of 

CASA EXPRESS TRUST,

Judgment Creditor, 

v. 

BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF 

VENEZUELA,

Judgment Debtor. 

_____________________________________/ 

DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff and Judgment Creditor Casa Express 

Corp’s, as Trustee of Casa Express Trust (“Plaintiff”), Motion for Default Final Judgment Against 

Impleaded Defendant Claudia Patricia Diaz Guillen (“Diaz Guillen”), ECF No. [179], filed on 

April 14, 2023. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Court enters FINAL 

JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiff against Diaz Guillen as follows: 

1. The following declaratory judgment is entered in favor of the Plaintiff pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2201: 

a. Plaintiff established a breach of fiduciary duty claim against Diaz Guillen. As the 

National Treasurer of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (“Venezuela”), Diaz 

Guillen owed a fiduciary duty to Venezuela to oversee the management of sovereign 

funds deposited in accounts of the Venezuelan National Treasury. She breached her 

fiduciary duty to Venezuela by accepting bribes from regime insiders that were derived 

from sovereign funds in exchange for allowing the insiders to misappropriate

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 7 of 9
2

Venezuelan funds with impunity. Diaz Guillen’s breach of duty directly and

proximately caused damages to Venezuela.

b. Plaintiff established an unjust enrichment claim against Diaz Guillen. Venezuela

conferred a benefit to Diaz Guillen by appointing her as the National Treasurer, which

charged her with the fiduciary responsibility to administer and protect sovereign funds

deposited in ONT accounts. Diaz Guillen knowingly and voluntarily accepted the

benefit and served as National Treasurer gaining accessto ONT accounts. Diaz Guillen

utilized her official position for her own pecuniary gain by accepting and retaining

bribes from regime insiders that were derived from sovereign funds at the expense of

Venezuela. It would be inequitable and unjust to allow Diaz Guillen to retain the

misappropriated Venezuelan funds (or the properties that were purchased with those 

funds).

c. Plaintiff established that Diaz Guillen’s conductsatisfiesthe elements necessary for the

imposition of a constructive trust. Diaz Guillen made a promise to manage the ONT,

which is charged with the fiduciary responsibility to administer and protect Venezuelan

funds deposited in ONT accounts. ECF No. [60] at p. 14. Venezuela entrusted Diaz

Guillen by granting her access to sovereign funds deposited in ONT accounts in

reliance of her express promise. Id. Diaz Guillen and Venezuela were in a confidential

relationship since she acted as an official of the Venezuelan government. Diaz Guillen

breached her express promise by accepting bribes from regime insiders and allowing

them to misappropriate sovereign funds deposited in ONT accounts. Diaz Guillen was 

unjustly enriched at the expense of Venezuela.

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 8 of 9
3

d. The Court reserves jurisdiction to award attorneys’ fees and costs in this proceeding to 

Plaintiff against Venezuela after a final disposition on the merits of the case.

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this _____ day of ______________, 2023, in Chambers

at Miami, Florida.

 _________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies provided to:

Counsel of Record

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 214 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/26/2023 Page 9 of 9