Tradeline Enters. Pvt. Ltd. v. Jess Smith & Sons Cotton, LLC
This text of Tradeline Enters. Pvt. Ltd. v. Jess Smith & Sons Cotton, LLC (Tradeline Enters. Pvt. Ltd. v. Jess Smith & Sons Cotton, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 2 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TRADELINE ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., No. 18-56101
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:15-cv-08048-JAK-RAO v.
JESS SMITH & SONS COTTON, LLC; MEMORANDUM* J.G. BOSWELL COMPANY,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California John A. Kronstadt, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted June 6, 2019 Portland, Oregon
Before: MURGUIA and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and GAITAN,** District Judge.
Tradeline Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (“Tradeline”) appeals a district court order
confirming an arbitration award in favor of Jess Smith & Sons Cotton, LLC (“JSS”)
and J.G. Boswell Company (“Boswell”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, sitting by designation. § 1291 and affirm.
The district court did not err by allowing non-signatories JSS and Boswell to
invoke the arbitration clause in a license agreement between Tradeline and the
Supima Association of America (“Supima”). State law controls whether federal
courts may enforce arbitration agreements against signatories at the request of non-
signatories. Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, 556 U.S. 624, 630–31 (2009). Under
Arizona law, which controls in this case, a non-signatory may compel arbitration
with a signatory to an arbitration agreement if the claims at issue are “intimately
founded in and intertwined with the underlying contract obligations.” Sun Valley
Ranch 308 Ltd. P’ship v. Robson, 294 P.3d 125, 135 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012) (quoting
Amisil Holdings Ltd. v. Clarium Capital Mgmt., 622 F.Supp.2d 825, 830–31 (N.D.
Cal. 2007)). The claims raised in Tradeline’s operative complaint against JSS and
Boswell are plainly “intertwined” with Tradeline’s license agreement with Supima.
The complaint alleges that JSS and Boswell caused Supima to breach and wrongfully
terminate the license agreement. The license agreement is thus integral to
Tradeline’s claims, which “arise out of and relate directly” to that contract. See id.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tradeline Enters. Pvt. Ltd. v. Jess Smith & Sons Cotton, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tradeline-enters-pvt-ltd-v-jess-smith-sons-cotton-llc-ca9-2019.