David v. Signal Intern., LLC

Decision Date08 December 2008
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 08-1220.
Citation588 F.Supp.2d 718
PartiesKurian DAVID, et al. v. SIGNAL INTERNATIONAL, LLC, et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana

Tracie L. Washington, The Louisiana Justice Institute, Jennifer J. Rosenbaum, New. Orleans Workers' Center for Racial Justice, New Orleans, LA, Anita Jain, Vincent Davitt, Dewey & Leboeuf LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Chandra S. Bhatnagar, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Tushar J. Sheth, Asian American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, New York, NY, Daniel Werner, Kristi L. Graunke, Mary C. Bauer, Morris S. Dees, Naomi Tsu, Immigrant Justice Project, Atlanta, GA, Robert P. Wynne, Samuel Justin Warf, Sean Gorman, Dewey & Leboeuf, LLP, Houston, TX, for Kurian David, et al.

Dominic Joseph Gianna, Alan Dean Weinberger, Donald C. Douglas, Jr., Erin Casey Hangartner, Paul John Mirabile, Middleberg, Riddle & Gianna, Patricia Anne F. Bollman, Attorney at Law, Ralph R. Alexis, III, Porteous, Hainkel & Johnson, Kevin Kennedy Gipson, Law Office of Kevin K. Gipson, Stephen H. Kupperman, Christy C. Harowski, Barrasso Usdin Kupperman Freeman & Sarver, LLC, New Orleans, LA, Johanna Malbrough McMullan, Page, Mannino, Peresich & McDermott, PLLC, Jackson, MS, Michael E. Whitehead, Page, Mannino, Peresich & McDermott, Biloxi, MS, Stephen H. Shapiro, Attorney at Law, Jefferson, LA, for Signal International, LLC, et al.

ORDER AND REASONS

JAY C. ZAINEY, District Judge.

Before the Court are the following motions: Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Improper Venue, and Failure to Plead Fraud With Particularity (Rec. Doc. 66) filed by defendants Global Resources, Inc. and Michael Pol, Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 70) filed by defendant Malvern C. Burnett, Gulf Coast Immigration Law Center, LLC, and Law Offices of Malvern C. Burnett, APC, Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively to Transfer (Rec. Doc.98) filed by defendant J & M Associates, Inc. of Mississippi, and Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Rec. Doc. 146) filed by defendants Dewan Consultants Pvt. Ltd. and Sachin Dewan. All motions are opposed. The motions, set for hearing on November 12, 2008, are before the Court on the briefs without oral argument.1

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs are a putative class of over 500 Indian men who secured visas to work in the United States for defendant Signal International, LLC in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Signal is in the business of providing construction services to the Gulf Coast oil and gas industry.

Plaintiffs allege that beginning in late 2003 defendants Dewan Consultants, Sachin Dewan, Global Resources, Inc. and Michael Pol placed advertisements in various newspapers across India and the United Arab Emirates seeking welders, fitters, and other marine fabrication workers on behalf of various U.S.-based companies. The advertisements promised that qualified candidates could obtain legal permanent residence (green cards) and thereby legally and permanently immigrate to the United States with their families. The plaintiffs contend that they payed exorbitant fees to the defendants for recruitment, immigration processing, and travel. Plaintiffs contend that unbeknownst to them they were never eligible to obtain the promised green cards and that once arriving in the United States they were subject to serious abuses and forced labor at Signal's labor camps in Pascagoula, Mississippi and in Orange, Texas.

Plaintiff Kurian David's declaration is representative of the factual assertions made by the other plaintiffs. (Rec. Doc. 174-3). David is a citizen of India. According to David, he saw a newspaper ad by Dewan Consultants while he was employed in Abu Dhabi. In May 2006, David attended a seminar led by defendant Sachin Dewan with the assistance of defendant Malvern Burnett. David claims that at the seminar Dewan told the attendees that for 600,000 rupees plus costs, he could get the workers an employment-based green card in the United States. The attendees were told that the money would be paid in three installments and that the money would cover Dewan's fee as well as fees for Burnett and Michael Pol. Burnett is an attorney at law specializing in immigration matters, and Pol owns Global Resources, Inc., a company in the business of assisting U.S. companies in finding skilled labor to work at their facilities. David claims that Burnett spoke at the seminar and explained to the potential recruitees how the green card process would work.

David took and passed a pipe fitter skills test. After successfully completing the skills test, David attended two additional group meetings, the second of which was led by Dewan and Burnett. Burnett explained the green card process once again and he and Dewan handed out contracts from Global Resources, Malvern Burnett, and Dewan Consultants, and an employment agreement for Signal International. A representative from Dewan's office helped the group to successfully fill out the forms.

In June and August 2006 David made installment payments at Dewan's office including checks made payable to Burnett and Pol. In late August 2006 David attended a meeting in Dubai where Dewan and Burnett told the workers that their visas had been applied for and that before those visas would expire the green cards would be approved. At a subsequent meeting Dewan and Burnett gave workers instructions on how to answer questions from the U.S. consular officers during their visa interviews. Dewan and Burnett allegedly instructed the workers not to reveal how much money they had paid for the recruitment fees and not to mention the green cards.

The consulate officials took David's passport and at the behest of Dewan Consultants the passport was returned directly to Dewan's office. According to David, Dewan refused to return his passport until he made the final installment payment to Dewan and paid for medical testing to be performed by a physician chosen by Dewan.

In February 2007 David made the final payment with checks made payable to Dewan, Burnett, and Pol. David claims that he was then rushed to sign forms written in English that he could not understand and it was only upon signing these forms and making the final installment payment that Dewan finally returned his passport. During this process David saw other workers attempt to back out and have their money returned but that someone from Dewan Consultants had threatened to destroy their passports in retaliation. David contends that he and his wife sold many of their personal belongings to raise the money necessary to pay Dewan, Burnett, and Pol.

On February 15, 2007, David arrived at Signal's labor camp in Orange, Texas where he signed a number of additional employment forms. David claims that he later learned that the forms permitted Signal to take deductions from his salary for food and accommodations and that Signal required the workers to open an account with a specific bank where their paychecks would be deposited. David charges that the living conditions and food at Signal were horrible and that the Indian workers were told that even if they left they would be charged the daily rate for room and board.

David claims that the Indian workers were searched by guards when they would come and go from the camp and that guards would sometimes come into the living quarters at night to search the workers' belongings. According to David, the workers began to get sick because of the overcrowded conditions and Signal required the workers to purchase all of their own tools. David claims that the Indian workers were relegated to doing all of the dangerous and dirty work inside of the ships and that the American workers were not required to do such work.

According to David when the workers complained Signal made more promises about green cards and threatened that if the workers continued to complain then they would be deported and not receive the promised visas. David continued to work under conditions that he characterized as horrible because he was afraid of the consequences of leaving given that he had incurred so much debt to raise the money to come to the United States.

Another declarant, Sony Vasudevan Sulekha makes similar claims about the conditions at Signal's Pascagoula, Mississippi facility. (Rec. Doc. 174-4). Sulekha compared the facility to a jail. Sulekha claims that on one occasion when employees complained about the conditions a Signal employee along with security guards locked several Indian workers in a room. One of the workers allegedly attempted suicide following this incident.

Plaintiffs assert class action claims against Defendants arising from violations of their rights under the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), the Civil Rights Act, and a host of other statutes. Several of the defendants have now moved to dismiss on various grounds.

II. DISCUSSION
1. Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Improper Venue, and Failure to Plead Fraud With Particularity (Rec. Doc. 66)

Defendants Michael Pol and Global Resources, Inc. (sometimes collectively referred to as "the Global Defendants") move to dismiss them from this case for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2). The Global Defendants also move to dismiss the case in its entirety for improper venue and to dismiss Plaintiffs' fraud claims pursuant to Rule 9(b) for failure to plead those claims with particularity. The Global Defendants argue that they are not subject to personal jurisdiction in Louisiana because they do not live or work here, do not currently conduct business in this state, do not advertise here, do not maintain bank accounts here, and directed no activities toward Louisiana. Pol points out that all meetings that he had with Burnett pertaining to the plaintiffs occurred in Mississippi and not in Louisiana.

The Global Defendants...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • JMF Med., LLC v. Team Health, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana
    • September 29, 2020
    ...which provide for nationwide service of process so long as one of the defendants is properly before the court." David v. Signal Int'l , 588 F.Supp.2d 718, 723 (E.D. La. 2008). Personal jurisdiction has been established over THH for the purposes of the RICO claim; therefore, this Court has p......
  • State Of La. v. La. Land & Exploration Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana
    • March 29, 2010
    ...personal jurisdiction over at least one defendant under Section 1965(a) and (2) the ends of justice so require. David v. Signal Int'l, LLC, 588 F.Supp.2d 718, 724 (E.D.La.2008). 15 Courts agree that the-ends-of-justice analysis is on case-by-case basis. See Cory, 468 F.3d at 1232 (mere alle......
  • Resources v. Carreno
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • June 9, 2020
    ...under § 1965(a) before other nonresident defendants become subject to nationwide service of process." David v. Signal Int'l, LLC, 588 F. Supp. 2d 718, 723 (E.D. La. 2008); (Docket Entry No. 109 at 34-35; Docket Entry No. 119 at 20). The parties dispute whether now-terminated defendant Juan ......
  • Jordan v. Maxfield & Oberton Holdings LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi
    • March 22, 2016
    ...by forcing the plaintiffs to fracture their claims across multiple forums to reach the various defendants.” David v. Signal Int'l, LLC , 588 F.Supp.2d 718, 724 (E.D.La.2008). But justice and judicial economy are also disserved by forcing the parties to conduct discovery and litigate in this......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT