Narrative Opinion Summary
Noel T. Benoist appeals the district court's dismissal of his action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failing to comply with a prior order to proceed to contractual arbitration. The court’s May 3, 1999 order was intended as a final adjudication, providing the appellate court jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The appellate review is conducted for abuse of discretion, and the court affirms the district court's dismissal based on the reasoning outlined in the May 3, 1999 order. The disposition is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in this circuit's courts, except as permitted under 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Jurisdiction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The May 3, 1999 order was considered a final adjudication, thereby providing the appellate court with jurisdiction to review the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Reasoning: The court’s May 3, 1999 order was intended as a final adjudication, providing the appellate court jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Dismissal Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The district court dismissed the appellant's action for failing to comply with a prior order to proceed to contractual arbitration, which constitutes a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
Reasoning: Noel T. Benoist appeals the district court's dismissal of his action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failing to comply with a prior order to proceed to contractual arbitration.
Non-Publication and Citation of Dispositionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's disposition is not eligible for publication and cannot be cited in the circuit's courts, except as allowed under specific rules.
Reasoning: The disposition is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in this circuit's courts, except as permitted under 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Standard of Review for Abuse of Discretionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reviewed the district court's decision for abuse of discretion, ultimately affirming the dismissal based on the district court's reasoning.
Reasoning: The appellate review is conducted for abuse of discretion, and the court affirms the district court's dismissal based on the reasoning outlined in the May 3, 1999 order.