{"id":777005332,"date":"2023-05-17T13:21:04","date_gmt":"2023-05-17T16:21:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/?p=777005332"},"modified":"2026-04-22T21:55:01","modified_gmt":"2026-04-23T00:55:01","slug":"ipi-files-motion-to-dismiss-junket-operator-claim","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/ipi-files-motion-to-dismiss-junket-operator-claim","title":{"rendered":"IPI files motion to dismiss junket operator claim"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Imperial Pacific International is seeking the dismissal of claims for breach of fiduciary duty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Northern Mariana Islands.- Imperial Pacific International (IPI) <\/strong>has requested the dismissal of allegations of a breach of fiduciary duty brought in a lawsuit by junket operator BigBang Entertainment<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The casino operator has filed a motion in the US District Court for the NMI seeking the dismissal of the fifth and sixth causes of action in the lawsuit. The junket operator is seeking the return of US$351,652.65 that were deposited as part of their business agreement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matthew Holley<\/strong>, representing IPI, says the suit fails to provide sufficient evidence supporting the claim that a fiduciary duty was owed to BigBang Entertainment. The lawsuit was filed in Superior Court on March 31, citing breach of contract, non-gratuitous bailment, conversion by demand and refusal, intentional breach of fiduciary duty, negligent breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPI’s motion to dismiss focuses solely on the breach of fiduciary duty claims. According to Holley, the lawsuit lacks a viable basis for relief in these particular causes of action. The outcome of the motion will determine whether the breach of fiduciary duty claims against IPI will proceed or be dismissed from the lawsuit. The legal proceedings continue as both parties present their arguments before the court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A week ago it was reported that attorney Michael Dotts\u2019 law firm<\/strong> is seeking the intervention of the Superior Court to enforce a judgment against IPI<\/a> for the amount of US$397,625.62, plus accrued interest. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court issued a default judgment against IPI on December 28, 2021, under Comm. R. Civ. Pro. 55 (b)(1), ordering the casino operator to make the payment. However, he says IPI has failed to comply with the court\u2019s order and has made no payment towards the judgment.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Imperial Pacific International is seeking the dismissal of claims for breach of fiduciary duty.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":176,"featured_media":19434,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"is_press_release":false,"is_interview":false,"is_opinion":false,"focusai_summary":"Imperial Pacific International (IPI) is seeking the dismissal of breach of fiduciary duty claims brought by junket operator BigBang Entertainment in the US District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands. Concurrently, IPI faces a separate legal challenge for non-compliance with a US$397,625.62 default judgment issued in 2021 for attorney fees. These proceedings highlight IPI's ongoing legal and financial challenges within the NMI gaming jurisdiction.","focusai_entities":"Imperial Pacific International, BigBang Entertainment, Matthew Holley, Michael Dotts","focusai_location":"Northern Mariana Islands, USA","focusai_target_profile":"ceo_executive (0.9), regulator (0.95), compliance_legal (0.95), operator_casino (0.85), investor_analyst (0.9), supplier_vendor (0.75), journalist_researcher (0.9)","focusai_suggestions":[{"label":"IPI License Impact?","query":"What are the potential implications of IPI's non-compliance with court judgments and ongoing legal challenges for the status of its gaming license in the Northern Mariana Islands?"},{"label":"Junket Relationship Precedent?","query":"How might the outcome of the breach of fiduciary duty claims against IPI influence future contractual and operational relationships between casino operators and junket providers in regulated iGaming markets?"}],"footnotes":""},"categories":[16336,439],"tags":[24134],"class_list":["post-777005332","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-australasia-news","category-legal-news","tag-imperial-pacific-international"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/777005332","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/176"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=777005332"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/777005332\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":777005349,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/777005332\/revisions\/777005349"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/19434"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=777005332"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=777005332"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=777005332"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}