IPI’s former chairwoman penalty of $1,000 a day to continue

Cui Li Jie has failed to provide backups of her electronically stored information.
Cui Li Jie has failed to provide backups of her electronically stored information.

Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has confirmed the $1,000-a-day sanction against former IPI chairwoman Cui Li Jie will continue to accrue.

Northern Mariana Islands.- Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has said the sanctions related to Cui Li Jie’s failure to comply with previous court orders regarding electronically stored information or ESI will continue until she complies.

The former IPI chairwoman is a third-party witness in the case in which seven construction workers accused IPI of labour abuse and human trafficking.

All ESI data held by the former IPI chairwoman remains relevant to the lawsuit as plaintiffs’ $5.4m default judgment against IPI remains unsatisfied, the court said.

According to Mariana’s Variety, Judge Manglona has ordered Cui Li Jie to submit a statement before January 22, 2022.

She said the deadline for plaintiffs to submit responses and statements is 5pm on February 3, while a hearing will be held on February 8.

Manglona then stated that “daily sanctions imposed by this court shall continue to accrue during this period”.

USA Fanter is no longer interested in IPI’s limited receivership

As previously reported by Focus Gaming News, Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona has recently revealed “IPI has fulfilled its promise to secure a bond totalling $2.45m” for the judgement in the lawsuit filed by USA Fanter Corp.

In her order, the judge also approved IPI’s motion to suspend the judgment during the appeal period; to approve the appeal deposit; to suspend the execution of the judgment during the appeal period and to stay the receivership.

According to Mariana’s Variety, Manglona said: “The court finds that IPI has fulfilled its obligation to satisfy the bond requirements under Rule 62(b) and Local Rule 62.1 and therefore a stay of USA Fanter’s judgment pending appeal is appropriate.”

However, she stated her decision “does not dissolve the receivership as it applies to other creditors just yet”.

In this article:
Imperial Pacific IPI