Carideo, et al v. USDC-WWS

Filing 920081216

Opinion

Download PDF
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In re: KRISTIN CARIDEO; CATHERINE CANDLER, KRISTIN CARIDEO; CATHERINE CANDLER, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, DELL, INC., Real Party in Interest. No. 07-74458 D.C. No. CV-06-01772-JLR ORDER 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 arbitration. PETITION DENIED. REMANDED FOR RECONSIDERATION. 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.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?