IPI allegedly defaults on payments, again

Xerox Corp. has asked the U.S District Court for the NMI to enforce a judgment on Imperial Pacific International (CNMI) LLC for failing to make an installment payment for the month of August to satisfy the judgment issued against it.

In a motion filed yesterday through attorney Richard Miller, Xerox asked the federal court to dissolve the 30-day automatic stay of proceedings and to enforce a judgment on IPI’s failure to make payments toward the $210,773.11 amended judgment issued in Xerox’s favor last month.

Back in August, the court issued an order in aid of judgment requiring IPI to make monthly installment payments of $10,000, due on the 14th of each month, starting in July 2021. The order stated that if IPI fails to make any payment in full and on time, IPI will be in default and will have until the 21st of each month to correct the default of the installment due in that month. If IPI fails to correct the default by the 21st, then the unpaid balance of the judgment amount will become immediately due and payable and if the failure to correct the default continues to the 30th of the month, Xerox may file a motion for an order to show cause.

Xerox argues that because the 30th day of August has passed as of the date of this motion, the entire balance on the amended judgment is immediately due.

“IPI made only one payment of $10,000, in July 2021, and since then has made no payment to satisfy the amended judgment. Therefore, under the order in aid of judgment, IPI is in default for failing to pay the installment payment due for the month of August. Because it is now past the 21st of that month and IPI has not cured the default, the entire balance is immediately due and payable,” said Miller.

The unpaid balance of the judgment, plus post-judgment interest accruing, is $200,781.20, without accounting for legal fees and expenses incurred for enforcement of the order in aid of judgment.

Miller argues that the court should dissolve the automatic stay and rule on the matter immediately due to the risk of IPI using its remaining assets to pay off other creditors.

“Dissolution of the stay is particularly appropriate because of the numerous actions that creditors have successfully brought against IPI in the past year in this jurisdiction for nonpayment, the court is fully aware of the company’s precarious financial condition and may take judicial notice of it. The risk that IPI’s assets would dissipate (or be used to pay off other creditors’ claims) is real and substantial,” Miller said.