IN response to Imperial Pacific International LLC chair Cui Li Jie’s request for more time to find a new lawyer, attorney Aaron Halegua said, “The record demonstrates a pattern of dishonesty and obstruction by Ms. Cui herself.”
Halegua represents the seven construction workers from China who have sued IPI and its former contractor and subcontractor over labor abuse and human trafficking allegations.
Recently, Halegua requested the federal court to impose a $10,000 daily sanction on Cui for not complying with a court order directing her to file a sworn statement that addresses all aspects of her creation and use of Electronically Stored Information or ESI data.
Cui, for her part, told the court that she was poorly represented in the court proceedings by her lawyer, Juan T. Lizama “who, for some reason beyond my comprehension, had failed to inform me of everything communicated to him by the opposite lawyers.”
In his response, Halegua said while “such arguments rarely prevail, Ms. Cui will have a full opportunity in her opposition to the order to show cause to make any and all arguments she desires as to how Mr. Lizama’s alleged lack of competence is responsible for each of her numerous failures to comply with the orders of the court.”
Halegua said Cui’s explanation “is unlikely to absolve her from a finding of civil contempt.”
He said Cui’s “attempt to place all blame on Mr. Lizama falls flat due to her own pattern of obstructionist and disobedient behavior. While Ms. Cui states that she has ‘been honest and cooperative in complying with the court’s orders and requests of the plaintiffs,’ this assertion is contradicted by the record in this case.”
Halegua said there are “numerous examples of bad faith and obstructionist conduct by [the] IPI chairwoman that do not have any connection to Mr. Lizama.”
He said Cui’s excuse that she does not speak English or “know the American legal system well” is also unpersuasive.
According to Halegua, the court repeatedly took great care to explain its orders to Cui through her chosen interpreter, Mr. Chi, during proceedings in this case.
“The plain reality is that Ms. Cui has obstructed plaintiffs from obtaining discovery at every turn. That is why more than two months after the order was issued, Ms. Cui still has not provided a sworn statement describing her creation and use of ESI Data and her cell phone still has not been copied. This pattern of noncompliance cannot all fall solely on the shoulders of Mr. Lizama. Moreover, it must also be recognized that Ms. Cui first raises this concern about Mr. Lizama’s competence only after the WeChat data on her phone has allegedly been deleted and after her SIM card was allegedly lost.
“Moreover, this allegation by Ms. Cui comes conveniently just before Mr. Lizama was prepared to mail her cell phone to New York — which appears to have now been delayed as well.
“Not only have Ms. Cui’s actions demonstrated clear disrespect for the authority of this court, but also have created a considerable burden on plaintiffs,” Halegua said.
In the nearly two months since the court issued its order, he added, the plaintiffs’ counsel has spent well over 45 hours seeking to compel Cui’s compliance.
“Despite all those efforts, Ms. Cui still has not provided information about her creation and use of ESI Data and no copies have been preserved — not even of her cell phone or WeChat account. Instead, WeChat data has allegedly been deleted and a SIM card has allegedly been lost.”
The plaintiffs were employed by IPI’s former contractor and subcontractor, MCC International and Gold Mantis, both of which have already settled with the plaintiffs.
Recently, Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona entered a $5.9 million default judgment in favor of the plaintiffs against IPI.
She has also scheduled a status hearing for June 3, 2021 at 8:15 a.m.
Aaron Halegua
