2021 Supreme(US)(ca5) 392
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Tango Marine – Appellant
Versus
Elephant Group – Respondent
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
FILED December 3, 2021 No. 21-10068 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Tango Marine S.A.,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Elephant Group Limited; Elephant Group, P.L.C.,
Defendants—Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:20-CV-42
Before Jones, Southwick, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges. Leslie H. Southwick, Circuit Judge: A maritime case was filed in the Northern District of Texas against two Nigerian business entities. The district court vacated the initial default against the Nigerian entities, but subsequent procedural errors led to a second default judgment that the district court refused to vacate. We AFFIRM. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Tango Marine S.A., a Grecian corporation, filed suit in the Northern District of Texas against two Nigerian businesses, Elephant Group Limited Case: 21-10068 Document: 00516116869 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/03/2021
No. 21-10068
and Elephant Group, P.L.C. (collectively, “Elephant Group”). Tango alleges that the Elephant Group chartered one of its vessels to deliver cargo to Lagos, Nigeria in 2016. Upon arrival in Lagos, though, the Nigerian port authorities prevented the unloading of the cargo. Tango alleges that the vessel was detained for two and a half years due to the Elephant Group’s failure to obtain proper permissions for the cargo, which caused damages for demurrage, supply, and maintenance charges. Tango also sought maritime attachment and garnishment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Supplemental Rule B. Serving process on the Nigerian entities proved difficult. The district court granted Tango’s request to serve the Elephant Group via email or mail. Approximately one month after this alternative service occurred and no response arrived, Tango sought entry of default, which the clerk entered. When no motion for default judgment appeared before the court, the court ordered Tango to file its motion for default judgment or explain its failure. Only after Tango filed its motion for default judgment did the Elephant Group participate in the suit by filing a motion for extension of time to file an answer and a notice of appearance. It also sought to have the default set aside, claiming that it was entering a restricted appearance under Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims Rule E(8). It stated it was appearing solely to contest the merits of the claim underlying the attachment. The court set aside the initial default but required the Elephant Group to pay Tango’s attorneys’ fees for their legal work up to that point. With the initial default set aside, the Elephant Group filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b), arguing that (1) the court lacked jurisdiction (both personal and subject matter), (2) the complaint failed to comply with Rule 8(a)(2), and (3) Tango failed to join an indispensable party.
2 Case: 21-10068 Document: 00516116869 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/03/2021