Sarjeant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES SARJEANT, et al., Case No. 24-cv-01216-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING AMERICAN

v. PRESIDENT LINE'S MOTION TO

DISMISS

FOSTER WHEELER LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 119 Defendants.

American President Lines has not shown that it is entitled to the relief that it moves for— dismissal of the request for punitive damages and loss of consortium damages. American President Lines argues that the statute that provides the cause of action does not permit such damages, as a matter of law. The statute itself is silent about what damages are available. See 33 U.S.C. § 905. The parties both assert that the Court should look to federal maritime law to fill the gap.1 And the parties agree that a core part of that inquiry is whether punitive and loss of consortium damages would have been available under general maritime law prior to the enactment of the statutory provision at issue. See The Dutra Group v. Batterton, 588 U.S. 358, 369 (2019). However, neither party has come close to providing the Court with sufficient legal analysis or historical context to answer the question. At this stage…