Previous Story
IPI fails to pay $122.45K in due sanction and costs
Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC informed the federal court yesterday that the company could still not pay the $122,449 in sanctions and costs that are due in connection with a pending lawsuit filed by seven former workers.
IPI, through counsel Michael W. Dotts, submitted before the U.S. District Court for the NMI a certification about its failure to pay the sanctions and costs, in response to Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona’s order on Friday directing the company to report to the court yesterday, Monday on the status of its payment. The sanctions and costs were due last Friday.
In his declaration yesterday, Dotts said IPI wants to be given 60 more days to pay. He pointed out that IPI’s casino has been closed since mid-March due to the COVID-19 pandemic and has no income. Right now, the company is reportedly subsisting on funds coming from its parent company in Hong Kong. Dotts said that IPI’s parent company has been funding payroll and some other costs, but has not indicated a willingness to pay the costs associated with this case at this time.
He said the pandemic has also affected China where IPI’s parent company is based and that funding even just payroll has been difficult for the parent company. He said he has been working with IPI to try to arrange payment on a daily basis. Dotts said that he was informed last Saturday that payments might be made but then received the “unfortunate news” last Sunday that the sanctions and costs could still not be paid.
The plaintiffs, who are now based in China, are suing IPI and its contractor MCC International Saipan Ltd. Co. and subcontractor Gold Mantis Construction Decoration (CNMI) LLC over the alleged injuries they suffered during accidents at the worksite of IPI’s casino/resort project in Garapan.
The sanctions and costs are related to the case filed by seven former workers, who are suing IPI for alleged forced labor in violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Re-authorization Act, forced labor in violation of the CNMI Anti-Trafficking Act, negligence, and liability for employees of subcontractor.
The plaintiffs alleged, among other things, that they were forced to work long hours for below minimum wage under extremely dangerous conditions at the casino-resort worksite.
In its response to the lawsuit, IPI, through counsel, said any wage claims by the plaintiffs are barred because they voluntarily illegally entered the CNMI to work.
