Bruce Thomas v. Snap-On Incorporated , 594 F. App'x 435 ( 2015 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAR 02 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
BRUCE THOMAS, an individual., No. 12-56525
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-01435-JAH-
RBB
v.
SNAP-ON INCORPORATED, a Delaware MEMORANDUM*
corporation,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 17, 2015**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
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
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
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).
2 12-56525
Thomas’s motion to expedite, filed on December 18, 2014, is denied as
moot.
AFFIRMED.
3 12-56525