From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Snap-On Inc.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Mar 2, 2015
594 F. App'x 435 (9th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 12-56525

03-02-2015

BRUCE THOMAS, an individual., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SNAP-ON INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation, Defendant - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 3:11-cv-01435-JAH-RBB MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California
John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding
Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Bruce Thomas appeals pro se from the district court's orders denying his post-judgment requests for an early neutral evaluation and a settlement conference in his action alleging that defendant misappropriated his intellectual property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo whether the district court had subject matter jurisdiction, Schnabel v. Lui, 302 F.3d 1023, 1029 (9th Cir. 2002), and review for an abuse of discretion the district court's compliance with its local rules concerning early neutral evaluation, Bias v. Moynihan, 508 F.3d 1212, 1223 (9th Cir. 2007).

Contrary to Thomas's contention, the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over his action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal courts have "original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States"); 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) (federal subject matter jurisdiction exists over disputes involving citizens of different states and an amount in controversy over $75,000.00).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Thomas's post-judgment requests for an early neutral evaluation and a settlement conference because Thomas did not have a complaint pending before the court. See Bias, 508 F.3d at 1223 ("Broad deference is given to a district court's interpretation of its local rules." (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also CivLR 16.1(c)(1) (an early neutral evaluation conference must be held within forty-five days of the filing of an answer or, if the answer has not been filed, as determined by the assigned judicial officer).

Thomas's motion to expedite, filed on December 18, 2014, is denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Snap-On Inc.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Mar 2, 2015
594 F. App'x 435 (9th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Thomas v. Snap-On Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BRUCE THOMAS, an individual., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SNAP-ON…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Mar 2, 2015

Citations

594 F. App'x 435 (9th Cir. 2015)