Opinion
2:22-cv-01058-JHC
12-11-2023
OCEAN SERVICES, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. OMNI2MAX, INC., a California corporation, Defendant.
ORDER
John H. Chun, United States District Judge
Before the Court is Plaintiff Ocean Services, LLC's motion for reconsideration (Dkt. # 36), to which Defendant Omni2Max, Inc. responded in opposition (Dkt. # 37). In the motion, Ocean Services seeks clarification on two issues:
(1) Whether the Court's order (Dkt. #35) incorporating the MSC contract into the BIMCO charter, precludes “a finding that the terms of the BIMCO are immaterial to this dispute as urged by Omni2Max.” Dkt. # 36 at 2.
(2) Whether the Court's statement that Ocean Services drafted “most of the MSC contract,” see Dkt. # 35 at 14, is a factual finding that cannot be challenged at trial. Dkt. # 36 at 2-3.
Construing Ocean Services' motion as a motion for clarification, which does not require the application of the LCR 7(h) standard, the Court issues the responses below:
(1) The Court directs the parties to review the following language of its previous order: “To the extent there is a conflict between the terms of [the BIMCO charter and the MSC Contract], the Court does not make any determinations as to which terms and conditions should control.” Dkt. # 35 at 15. In accordance with this statement, the Court does not issue any findings on whether the BIMCO charter terms are material or immaterial to the parties' dispute.
(2) On page 14 of its order (Dkt. # 35), the Court wrote that Ocean Services drafted “most of the MSC contract.” After review of the briefing and pertinent portions of the record, see Dkt. #25-22 at 26-28; Dkt. # 25-24 at 3, the Court AMENDS the sentence at issue to read: “with Ocean Services drafting both the BIMCO charter and most of the proposal to the MSC solicitation.” See Dkt. # 35 at 14. The Court will issue an amended order reflecting this change.