Carideo v. United States District Court for the Western District of Washington

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: December 16, 2008
• Docket: 07-74458
• Status: Published

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: KRISTIN CARIDEO; CATHERINE  CANDLER,

KRISTIN CARIDEO; CATHERINE CANDLER, No. 07-74458 Petitioners, v.  D.C. No. CV-06-01772-JLR UNITED STATES DISTRICT ORDER COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, DELL, INC., Real Party in Interest.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 9, 2008* Seattle, Washington

Filed December 16, 2008

Before: Ronald M. Gould, Richard C. Tallman, and Consuelo M. Callahan, Circuit Judges.

*The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

16433 16434 IN RE CARIDEO COUNSEL

Beth E. Terrell, Terrell Marshall & Daudt PLLC, Seattle, Washington, for petitioners Kristin Carideo and Catherine Candler.

Paul Schlaud, Reeves & Brightwell LLP, Austin, Texas, for real party in interest Dell Inc.

ORDER

The petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED without prejudice. In light of the intervening authority of McKee v. AT & T Corp., 191 P.3d 845 (Wash. 2008), this case is remanded to the district court to reconsider its order denying Petitioners’ Rule 60(b) motion for relief from its order compelling arbitra- tion.

PETITION DENIED. REMANDED FOR RECONSID- ERATION. PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West.