MEMORANDUM AND ORDER “[The] prime object [of the Carmack Amendment] was to bring about a uniform rule of responsibility as to interstate commerce and interstate commerce bills of lading.”1 This case implicates what appears to be one of the more comprehensive federal regulatory schemes enacted by Congress. The Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act of 1877 originated in the early twentieth century, having passed into legislation over a century ago in 1906. It is widely considered as embodying the congressional intent to take possession of the field of carrier liability for the shipment of goods in interstate commerce. The gravamen of the case involves Defendants’ alleged delay or failure to timely deliver stone and return railcars pursuant to a transportation contract between the parties. The stone itself was not damaged, but the delay in returning the railcars to Plaintiff led to damages and ultimately the demise of Plaintiff’s business according to the Complaint. Before the Court are the parties’ motions and cross-motions for summary judgment (DE 74; DE 76). Specifically, Azzil now moves for partial summary judgment on liability as to its breach of contract claims against Defendants (Counts IV-V). (DE 74.) Defendants in turn cross-move for summary judgment on all counts. (DE 76.) Together the motions raise the following two questions: First, are Plaintiff’s breach of contract claims within the ambit of the Carmack Amendment? And if so, then second, did Plaintiff comply with the procedural requirements of the Carmack Amendment? Simple as these posited questions may seem, they present a Gordian knot. For the reasons stated below, Azzil’s motion for partial summary judgment (DE 74) is denied, and Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment (DE 76) is hereby granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Azzil Granite Materials, LLC (“Azzil”) filed this action asserting breach of contract claims against Canadian Pacific Railway Corporation (“CP”) and Delaware & Hudson Railway Company (“D&H”) (Count IV), and New York and Atlantic Railway (Count V) (“NYA,” collectively with CP and D&H, “Defendants”), as well as claims under the Carmack Amendment, 49 U.S.C. §11706, against Defendants (Count I-III). (DE 1.) Defendants answered the Complaint (DE 29; DE 30) and the parties engaged in discovery. Both sides now claim the case is ripe for summary judgment. I. Relevant Undisputed Material Facts2 Azzil sells stone products (“stone”) throughout the tri-state area, including New York. (DE 78-1 at 1.) On or around July 6, 2016, Azzil entered into a rail transportation contract (“Agreement”) with CP for and/or on behalf of D&H (a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of CP), to transport Azzil’s stone products. (DE 78-1 at
3, 5.) After entering into the Agreement, Azzil began to ship a portion of its stone by rail. (DE 77-5 at 11.) The Agreement was renewed on January 15, 2018. (DE 77-5 at 26.) The Agreement was to transport Plaintiff’s railcars from Whitehall, New York or Comstock, New York to Sill, New York or Hicksville, New York, identified in Schedule A of the Agreement. (DE 78-1 at
