Brandt v. Qintex America Ltd.

5 F.3d 535 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James BRANDT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. QUINTEX AMERICA LIMITED; Qintex Media, B.V.; Qintex Australia Limited; Christopher C. Skase; David J. Evans; Johnathan D. Lloyd, Robert Halmi, Sr., Robert Halmi, Jr., Robert B. Campbell, Richard A.J. Capps, Roger M. Kimmel Kevin W. Schultz, Bruce G. Sundlun, Robin H. French and Hal E. Gaba, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-55531. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 6, 1993. Decided Sept. 10, 1993. Before: NOONAN, FERNANDEZ and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. ORDER 1 Appellant James Brandt at oral argument chose to withdraw his appeal of the district court's ruling that he failed to file his Rule 10b-5 claim before the statute of limitations' period expired. Consequently we cannot reach his appeal of the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants on his federal securities claims. 2 At oral argument Brandt asked the panel to…