Joe B. Ritchey v. Upjohn Drug Company, a Delaware Corporation

57 F.3d 1077 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Joe B. RITCHEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UPJOHN DRUG COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-15171. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 6, 1995. * Decided June 8, 1995. Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Joe B. Ritchey appeals the district court's summary judgment for defendant Upjohn Drug Company ("Upjohn") based on the statute of limitations in his personal injury diversity action. Ritchey alleged that he suffered injury as a result of his ingestion of the prescription medication Halcion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 1 3 We review de novo the district court's ruling on the appropriate state statute of limitations. F.D.I.C. v. McSweeney, 976 F.2d 532, 534 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2440 (1993). "While resolution of the statute of limitations issue is normally a question of fact,…