Pucella v. Sonoma Coffee Café LLC

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 01 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PASQUALE PUCELLA; MICHELA No. 12-17433
AFFLITTO,
D.C. No. 2:12-cv-00417-ROS
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v. MEMORANDUM*
SONOMA COFFEE CAFÉ LLC; et al.,
Defendants,
and
BECKY SMITH; GORDON SMITH,
Defendants - Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 22, 2014**
Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Becky and Gordon Smith appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment
confirming an arbitration award against them due to their noncompliance with a
local rule. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse
of discretion. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). We
reverse and remand.
Because a review of the record shows that the arbitrator did not impose any
liability against the Smiths in the arbitration award, summary confirmation of the
arbitration award against the Smiths was improper. See United States v. Prairie
Pharmacy, Inc., 921 F.2d 211, 212 (9th Cir. 1990) (a district court abuses its
discretion where “the record contains no evidence on which it could rationally base
its decision” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s judgment against the Smiths and
remand for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. We do not reach
the Smiths’ remaining contentions and we do not disturb the district court’s
judgment against any other defendant.
Appellees’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs, set forth in their answering
brief, is denied.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
2 12-17433