Opinion
No. 08-56332.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed December 11, 2009.
Joseph Alioto, Jr., Trial, Joseph M. Alioto, Alioto Law Firm, San Francisco, CA, Thomas P. Bleau, Esquire, Bleau Fox, A. P.L.C., Los Angeles, CA, Daniel R. Shulman, Esquire, Gray, Plant, Mooty, Mooty Bennett, P.A., Minneapolis, MN, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Bradley S. Phillips, Stuart Neil Senator, Munger, Tolles Olson LLP, Bryan Alexander Merryman, Esquire, White Case LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Craig Stewart, Jones Day, San Francisco, CA, Vincent R. Fitzpatrick, Jr., White Case, LLP, New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, George H. King, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01283-GHK-JWJ.
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plaintiffs appeal the district court's dismissal of their antitrust action as barred by the statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, review de novo, Williams v. Boeing Co., 517 F.3d 1120, 1135 (9th Cir. 2008), and affirm.
The district court correctly ruled that the limitations period for this class action was not tolled by a prior class action. Robbin v. Fluor Corp., 835 F.2d 213, 214 (9th Cir. 1987). Nor does Catholic Soc. Servs., Inc. v. INS, 232 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc), compel a different result. None of the peculiar reasons justifying tolling in that case is present in this case. Id. at 1147-49.
AFFIRMED.