Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Maryland resolves motions to dismiss claims arising from the cancellation of a Puerto Rico water-infrastructure public-private partnership project. The court addresses personal jurisdiction, pleading sufficiency, tortious interference, aiding and abetting, conspiracy, and choice-of-law issues, grants the motions to dismiss in part, grants a motion to seal exhibits, and dismisses the complaint.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court could exercise personal jurisdiction over the non-Maryland Xylem Defendants under Maryland's long-arm statute, including through a conspiracy theory of personal jurisdiction.
- Whether the plaintiff's claims against the Moonshot Defendants were barred by the statute of limitations.
- Whether Maryland choice-of-law principles required application of Puerto Rico law to the tort claims.
- Whether the plaintiff stated plausible claims for tortious interference with a business relationship, aiding and abetting tortious interference, or conspiracy to interfere with a business relationship under Puerto Rico law.
- Whether Moonshot's motion to seal specified exhibits should be granted.
Holdings
- The court lacked personal jurisdiction over the Xylem Defendants because the complaint did not make a prima facie showing that they were subject to Maryland's long-arm statute, including under a conspiracy theory of jurisdiction.
- The plaintiff's claims against the Moonshot Defendants were timely because they accrued when the plaintiff was formally notified of cancellation of the original request for proposals on December 2, 2021, and the complaint was filed within three years.
- Puerto Rico law governed the plaintiff's tort claims.
- The plaintiff failed to state plausible claims for tortious interference with a business relationship, aiding and abetting tortious interference, or conspiracy to interfere with a business relationship because it had no contract with the Puerto Rico Public-Private Partnership Authority or the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority.
- The court granted Moonshot's motion to seal Exhibits 1, 4, and 7 to the joint record because the exhibits contained confidential business information subject to a protective order in prior litigation.
Key quotations
“Because the allegations in the complaint, taken as true, are not sufficient to show that the Moonshot Defendants and the Xylem Defendants conspired to interfere with the Plaintiff’s business relationship with the P3 Authority in Maryland, the Court GRANTS-in-PART the Xylem Defendants’ motion to dismiss” (Section IV.A)
“The absence of a contractual relationship with either the P3Authority and/or PRASA is fatal to the Plaintiff’s tort claims under the law of Puerto Rico.” (Section IV.C)
“For the foregoing reasons, the Court: (1) GRANTS-in-PART the Moonshot Defendants’ motion to dismiss” (Section V)
Factual background
The plaintiff, a Netherlands entity formerly known as Miya Water Projects Netherlands B.V., was selected as the preferred proponent for a Puerto Rico public-private partnership project involving replacement of water meters and related billing and analytics infrastructure. The Puerto Rico Public-Private Partnership Authority later canceled the original request for proposals before the plaintiff and the Authority executed a project agreement, and a revised procurement was issued. The plaintiff alleged that Moonshot, its president George Hawkins, Xylem, and Sensus interfered with the procurement by providing misleading information and coordinating to cause cancellation of the original request for proposals.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed the complaint on November 27, 2024. Defendants filed motions to dismiss on March 21, 2025, Plaintiff opposed, and the motions were fully briefed. The court dismissed the claims against the Xylem Defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction, held that the claims against the Moonshot Defendants were timely but implausible under Puerto Rico law because no contract existed, granted Moonshot's motion to seal, and dismissed the complaint.