SAMSON v. NAMA HOLDINGS, LLC, 629 F.3d 980 (2010)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Number: infco20101215159
Visitors: 18
Filed: Dec. 15, 2010
Latest Update: Dec. 15, 2010
Summary: ORDER As to Appeal No. 09-55835, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its May 20, 2009 Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Arbitration. Appeal No. 09-56394, challenging the district court's award of prevailing party attorneys' fees to Defendant, is therefore moot. APPEAL NO. 09-55835: AFFIRMED. APPEAL NO. 09-56394: MOOT. FootNotes * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). ** The
Summary: ORDER As to Appeal No. 09-55835, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its May 20, 2009 Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Arbitration. Appeal No. 09-56394, challenging the district court's award of prevailing party attorneys' fees to Defendant, is therefore moot. APPEAL NO. 09-55835: AFFIRMED. APPEAL NO. 09-56394: MOOT. FootNotes * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). ** The ..
More
ORDER
As to Appeal No. 09-55835, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its May 20, 2009 Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Arbitration. Appeal No. 09-56394, challenging the district court's award of prevailing party attorneys' fees to Defendant, is therefore moot.
APPEAL NO. 09-55835: AFFIRMED.
APPEAL NO. 09-56394: MOOT.
FootNotes
* The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
** The Honorable Rudi M. Brewster, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
Source: Leagle
