PNI, INC. v. LEYTON

3 Citing cases

  1. Escobar v. Nat'l Maint. Contractors

    3:20-cv-01695-SB (D. Or. Aug. 12, 2021)   Cited 2 times

    Campos v. Blue stem Brands, Inc., No. 3:15-cv-00629-SI, 2016 WL 297429, at *12 (D. Or. Jan. 22, 2016) ("Because [the plaintiffs] only claim is subject to arbitration, the Court finds that dismissal is appropriate."); Hermida v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., No. 3:15-cv-00810-HZ, 2015 WL 6739129, at *6 (D. Or. Nov. 3, 2015) (granting the defendant's motion to compel arbitration and stay or abate proceeding, and dismissing case); PNI, Inc. v. Leyton, No. 03-1344-MO, 2004 WL 555249, at *6 (D. Or. Mar. 1, 2004) (granting the defendants' motion to compel arbitration and for dismissal or stay of proceedings, and dismissing case without prejudice).

  2. Olson v. MBO Partners, Inc.

    No. 3:15-cv-2216-HZ (D. Or. Jun. 15, 2017)   Cited 2 times

    Sparling, 864 F.2d at 638. Courts in this jurisdiction typically dismiss the case when all disputes are subject to arbitration. See Sparling, 864 F.2d at 638; see also Willamette Crest Gaming, LLC v. Play N Trade Franchise, Inc., No. CIV. 09-461-ST, 2009 WL 2243811, at *9 (D. Or. July 27, 2009) (dismissing the case because nothing would be left for the court to resolve after arbitration); PNI, Inc. v. Leyton, No. CIV. 03-1344-MO, 2004 WL 555249, at *5 (D. Or. Mar. 1, 2004) ("Because the court holds that all pending claims are arbitrable, it grants defendants' motion to dismiss . . . ."). This Court has found that all of Plaintiff's claims against Defendant are subject to arbitration and Plaintiff provides no reason to stay the case rather than dismiss it.

  3. Thompson v. Federico

    324 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (D. Or. 2004)   Cited 20 times

    Given plaintiff's acknowledgment that the relevant arbitration clause applies to investments bought through Dean Witter, the clause's broad language, and lack of any persuasive explanation for why that clause does not apply to the Dean Witter-related claims asserted here, the court cannot say "`with positive assurance that the arbitration clause does not govern'" those claims. PNI, Inc. v. Leyton, No. 03-1344, 2004 WL 555249, at *2 (D. Or. March 1, 2004) (quoting United Steelworkers of Am. v. Warrior Gulf Navigation Co., 363 U.S. 574, 582 (1960)). The court thus dismisses plaintiff's claims to the extent they are based on investments purchased through Dean Witter.