1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 MINUTE ORDER – 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

OFFSHORE-INLAND SERVICES OF

ALABAMA, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

R/V DEEPOCEAN QUEST (ex NADIR), IMO

No. 7347823, in rem, OCEAN SERVICES, LLC,

in personam, and CASEMO INTERNATIONAL,

S.A.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. C06-0183-JCC

 Consolidated with C06-1114-JCC

IN ADMIRALTY

 

 MINUTE ORDER

DEEP OCEAN QUEST, S.A., a foreign

corporation,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

STABBERT MARITIME YACHT & SHIP,

LLC, a Washington limited liability company

d/b/a Stabbert Maritime Yacht & Ship, Inc.;

SMY&S, INC., a Washington corporation d/b/a

Venture Pacific Marine Inc.; OCEAN

SERVICES, LLC, a Washington limited liability

company; STABBERT MARITIME

HOLDINGS, LLC, a Washington limited liability

company; STABBERT MARITIME, LLC, a

Washington limited liability company;

STABBERT YACHT AND SHIP, LLC, a

Washington limited liability company;

STABBERT YACHT AND SHIP HOLDING,

LLC, a Washington limited liability company;

and DAN STABBERT and his marital

community d/b/a Stabbert Maritime Yacht &

Ship, Inc., 

 Defendants.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 MINUTE ORDER – 2

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. 

Coughenour, United States District Judge:

In its Order of May 5, 2009 (Dkt. No. 341), this Court ordered that Defendant Stabbert Maritime,

Inc. (“S.M., Inc.”) submit, as soon as practicable, the following:

(1) A proposed writ or writs of pre-judgment attachment, attaching (a) “any payments or right of

payment or reimbursement from the insurance underwriters or FIS Marine to [Deep Ocean

Quest, S.A. (“DOQ”)] relating to its ‘Heavy Weather-Hurricane Katrina’ insurance claim,” (b)

“any payment or right of payment from DOE to DOQ in relation to its bankruptcy claim,” and

(c) to the extent S.M., Inc. believed it was appropriate, “any proceeds from the future sale of the

ALUCIA”; 

(2) A Reply brief supporting its request for pre-judgment attachment of the proceeds from the future

sale of the ALUCIA;

(3) A bond of $3,000 to support the writ(s) of pre-judgment attachment; and 

(4) A proposed writ of pre-judgment garnishment “to FIS Marine as garnishee, requiring garnishee

to hold all funds currently held or hereafter received for the benefit of DOQ until further order of

this Court or full satisfaction of judgment in this matter.” 

The Court also ruled that DOQ would have, as requested, five days to file any objections or otherwise

respond to the form of the proposed writ(s) of pre-judgment attachment. (Dkt. No. 341 at 5.) The Court

declined to permit DOQ time to object to the form of the proposed writ of pre-judgment garnishment,

however, in part because expediency appeared to be required, given the expected timing of a

forthcoming insurance payment to FIS. (Id. at 6.)

To date, the Court has received the bond, along with proposed writs of pre-judgment attachment

as to the insurance payment and the bankruptcy claim. However, although S.M., Inc. has filed a Reply

brief addressing its request for pre-judgment attachment of future ALUCIA sale proceeds (Dkt. No.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 MINUTE ORDER – 3

342), the Court has not received a proposed writ of pre-judgment attachment of those proceeds. Nor has

it received a proposed writ of pre-judgment garnishment to FIS Marine. 

After full consideration of the briefing, including S.M., Inc.’s Reply brief (Dkt. No. 342), the

Court is persuaded that the uncertainty of DOQ’s bankruptcy claim justifies granting the additional

security of attachment of future ALUCIA sale proceeds up to the amount of any outstanding judgment

balance. S.M., Inc. is DIRECTED to file each of its proposed writs on the docket (and email a Word or

WordPerfect version to coughenourorders@wawd.uscourts.gov) so that DOQ may make any objections

to the form of the writs of pre-judgment attachment and to facilitate the clerk’s issuance of the writs.

DATED this 11th day of May, 2009.

BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk of Court

By /s/ V. Perez 

Deputy Clerk