Jagdishbhai and Hansaben Patel v. Del Taco, Inc.

Bad Law
446 F.3d 996·2006 WL 1148735·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 10882
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 2, 200604-16208, 04-16604California1,639 words

Opinion

Opinion

Holland, J.

In this consolidated appeal, Jagdishbhai and Hansaben Patel (“the Patels”) seek review of two orders issued by the district court: 1) an order granting Del Taco’s motion to remand and awarding attorney’s fees and 2) an order staying the Patels’ federal claims and compelling arbitration of those claims. We dismiss the appeal from the remand order based on 28 U.S.C. § 1441 for lack of jurisdiction. We affirm as to the remand order based on 28 U.S.C. § 1443 and as to the award of attorney’s fees. We also dismiss the appeal from the order staying the federal claims and compelling arbitration of those claims for lack of jurisdiction.

Background

The Patels entered into a franchise agreement with Del Taco, Inc. under which the Patels were to operate a Del Taco restaurant in Hanford, California. The franchise agreement contained an ar bitration clause that provided that “any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, whether such [a] controversy is one of law, fact or both, shall be submitted to arbitration” before the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) in Orange County, California. In 2003, Del Taco accused the Patels of breaching the franchise agreement…

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.