Rosenthal & Rosenthal of Ca v. Hilco Trading, LLC

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 3, 202221-55070California649 words

Opinion

Opinion

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

JAN 3 2022

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROSENTHAL & ROSENTHAL OF No. 21-55070

CALIFORNIA, INC.,

D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 2:19-cv-10315-SVW-MAA

v.

MEMORANDUM*

HILCO TRADING, LLC, DBA Hilco Global; ERIC W. KAUP, an Individual,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted December 7, 2021 Pasadena, California

Before: W. FLETCHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and BENCIVENGO,** District Judge.

Rosenthal & Rosenthal of California, Inc. (Rosenthal) appeals the district

court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Hilco Trading, LLC (Hilco) and

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Cathy Ann Bencivengo, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation. Eric W. Kaup (Kaup). Rosenthal maintains that it raised a material factual dispute

regarding…

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.