Greiner

Greiner v. Tesla Inc.

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 20, 202525-399California454 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 20 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAMES GREINER, No. 25-399 D.C. No. 2:23-cv-00305-JAG Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MEMORANDUM*

TESLA INC., “Tesla”; ELON MUSK, “Elon”,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington James A. Goeke, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**

Submitted October 15, 2025***

Before: FRIEDLAND, MILLER, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.

James Greiner appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his diversity action alleging state law claims in connection with an arbitration

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). *** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). proceeding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a

dismissal for failure…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.