In Re: FKM Inc, et al

*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should
not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in
5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 11, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-20594
Summary Calendar
In Re: In the matter of the Complaint of FKM, Inc for Exoneration
from or Limitation of Liability
FKM, Inc.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CLETO WILLIAMS,
Claimant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Texas
(USDC No. 4:03-CV-3804)
_________________________________________________________
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
FKM, Inc. appeals the district court’s order granting Cleto Williams’ motion to lift
stay in this action brought under the Limitation of Liability Act, 46 U.S.C. app. §§ 181-
195 (the Act). We affirm.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
We essentially agree with the analysis given by the district court, and can find no
error of law or abuse of discretion that would warrant overturning the order. So long as
the district court hearing the limitation action “satisfies itself that a vessel owner’s right to
seek limitation will be protected, the decision to dissolve the injunction is well within the
court’s discretion.” Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc., 531 U.S. 438, 454 (2001).
While Lewis did not involve the precise issue pending before us, we believe that the
essential purpose of the Act in these circumstances—to limit FKM’s liability to the value
of the limitation fund—was preserved.
Perhaps one party or the other has engaged in forum shopping, and perhaps one
court or the other should entertain a motion for intra-district transfer, but that issue is not
before us.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --