Search for cases

CISG-online number
5845
Case name
Shenzen Synergy Digital Co., Ltd. v. Mingtel, Inc.
Jurisdiction
USA
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Chamber
Sherman Division
Judge
Amos L. Mazzant (District Judge)
Date of decision
29 March 2022
Case nr./docket nr.
4:19-cv-00216
Claimant 1
Name
Shenzen Synergy Digital Co., Ltd.
Place of business
China
Role in transaction
Seller
Respondent 1
Name
Mingtel, Inc.
Place of business
USA
Role in transaction
Buyer
Case History
Shenzen Synergy Digital Co., Ltd. v. Mingtel, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
USA, 02 November 2020 – 4:19-cv-00216, CISG-online 5418
Present decision
Shenzen Synergy Digital Co., Ltd. v. Mingtel, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
USA, 22 June 2022 – 4:19-cv-00216, CISG-online 5948
Shenzen Synergy Digital Co., Ltd. v. Mingtel, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
USA, 18 July 2023 – 22-40440, CISG-online 6392
affirming
Seller 1
Name
Shenzen Synergy Digital Co., Ltd.
Place of business
China
Role in trade
Manufacturer of the goods sold
Buyer 1
Name
Mingtel, Inc.
Place of business
USA
Role in trade
Dealer / Trader
Category of goods
75: Office machines and automatic data-processing machines
Goods as per contract
20,000 computer tablets (10,000 tablets with 16 GB storage and 10,000 tablets with 32 GB storage)
Price
1'493'200.00 USD (U.S. Dollar)
CISG applicable
yes, Art. 1(1)(a) and parties' agreement
Key CISG provisions interpreted and applied
Art. 29(1); Art. 38(1); Art. 39(1); Art. 39(2); Art. 74; Art. 78
Key CISG provisions interpreted
Art. 8(3); Art. 77
Key CISG provisions applied
Art. 25; Art. 40; Art. 71; Art. 72; Art. 76
CISG provisions also cited
Art. 9; Art. 35(1); Art. 35(2); Art. 36(1); Art. 53; Art. 58; Art. 60(2); Art. 69(1); Art. 75
Relevant CISG provisions not cited
Art. 35(2)(a); Art. 35(2)(b)
This decision cites the following other CISG-online cases 18
BP Oil International, Ltd. v. Empresa Estatal Petroleos de Ecuador (PetroEcuador)
U.S. Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
USA, 11 June 2003 – 02-20166, CISG-online 730
Hefei Ziking Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. v. Meever & Meever et al.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas
USA, 20 September 2021 – 4:20-CV-00425, CISG-online 5685
Chicago Prime Packers, Inc. v. Northam Food Trading Co.
U.S. Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
USA, 23 May 2005 – 04-2551, CISG-online 1026
Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Power Source Supply, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
USA, 25 July 2008 – 07-140-JJf, CISG-online 1776
Barbara Berry, S.A. de C.V. v. Ken M. Spooner Farms, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
USA, 02 April 2009 – C 05-5538FDB, CISG-online 1881
Goodview Electronic (Nanjing) Co., Ltd. v. Digital Spectrum Solutions, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
USA, 25 April 2011 – SACV 09-00530-CJC(ANx), CISG-online 4657
Chicago Prime Packers, Inc. v. Northam Food Trading Co.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
USA, 21 May 2004 – 01 C 4447, CISG-online 851
Shantou Real Lingerie Manufacturing Co., Ltd. v. Native Group Int'l, Ltd.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
USA, 23 August 2016 – 14cv10246-FM, CISG-online 1667
Miami Valley Paper, LLC v. Lebbing Engineering & Consulting GmbH
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
USA, 26 March 2009 – 1:05-CV-00702, CISG-online 1880
MCC-Marble Ceramic Center, Inc. v. Ceramica Nuova D'Agostino S.p.A.
U.S. Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
USA, 29 June 1998 – 97-4250, CISG-online 342
Solae, LLC v. Hershey Canada, Inc.
U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
USA, 09 May 2008 – 07-140-JJF, CISG-online 1769
Doolim Corp. v. R Doll, LLC et al.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
USA, 29 May 2009 – 08 Civ. 1587(BSJ)(HBP), CISG-online 1892
Shuttle Packaging Systems, L.L.C. v. Jacob Tsonakis, INA S.A. et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan
USA, 17 December 2001 – 1:01-CV-691, CISG-online 773
Delchi Carrier, SpA v. Rotorex Corp.
U.S. Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
USA, 06 December 1995 – 95-7182, 95-7186, CISG-online 140
Al Hewar v. Southeast Ranch, LL.C.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
USA, 08 November 2011 – 10-80851-CV-HURLEY/HOPKINS, CISG-online 4064
Sunrise Foods Int'l, Inc. v. Ryan Hinton Inc.
U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho
USA, 08 August 2019 – 1:17-CV-00457-CWD, CISG-online 4522
Cedar Petrochemicals, Inc. v. Dongbu Hannong Chemical Co., Ltd.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
USA, 28 September 2011 – 06 Civ. 3972 (LTS)(JCF), CISG-online 2338
Caffaro Chimica S.r.l. et al. v. Sipcam Agro USA et al.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
USA, 15 July 2008 – 1:07-CV-2471-MHS, CISG-online 5529
This decision cites the following CISG-AC Opinions 2
Comment on this decision 1
Burghard Piltz, 'Neue Entwicklungen im UN-Kaufrecht', Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (NJW) (2023), 2542–2548, at 2546–2547 [– in German]
Full text of decision 1
Full text of decision