Pathak v. Molopo EnergyU.S. DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF...

Pathak v. Molopo Energy
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Alternative Dispute Resolution

Australia's Molopo Energy Ltd. (Molopo) has offices in Canada. Pathak headed subsidiary Molopo Energy India (P) Ltd. (MEIP). MEIP negotiated a 2009 contract between Molopo and India's Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research to extract methane from Indian government-owned coal fields (CMM Agreement). In 2011 Molopo sought Pathak's help in leaving India. He planned Molopo's transfer of MEIP to him. Molopo did not transfer or assign its rights under the CMM Agreement to Pathak or MEIP. Molopo later stopped paying Pathak. Relying on the CMM Agreement's arbitration clause, Pathak and MEIP sought to compel Molopo to arbitrate severance claims in India. The court found it lacked jurisdiction over Molopo. Evidence separated from Pathak's residence in New York, did not show Molopo's transaction of business in New York "sustained" or "substantial." Thus Civil Practice Law and Rules §302(a) was not met. Further, their claims sounded in contract and situs of Pathak's injury was not in New York. Noting Pathak signed the CMM Agreement only as a witness, the court found Pathak and MEIP inadequately alleged the existence of a binding arbitration agreement between either of them and Molopo.

Read more: http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202622403555&Pathak_v_Molopo_Energy#ixzz2hEekb9N1

DUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 10 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (personal, and subject matter jurisdiction) filed by Molopo Energy Ltd. Accordingly, Respondent's motion is GRANTED, and the petition is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/2/2013) (lmb)