ECC Systems, Inc. v. Mallinckrodt Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
1. The appeal to this court was timely filed. The motion that ECC Systems filed in the district court, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), asking that court to reconsider its affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s decision, properly may be treated as a motion for rehearing under Bankruptcy Rule 8015. We have held that the label that a party attaches to a post-judgment motion is not dispositive for purpose of tolling the time in which to file a notice of appeal. See Shapiro v. Paradise Valley Unified Sch. Dist. No. 69, 374 F.3d 857 , 863 (9th Cir. 2004). ECC’s motion therefore tolled its time for filing a notice of appeal, making its appeal timely.
2. Because the Supreme Court of California apparently has not determined the permissible kind of damages for breach of a contract to negotiate an agreement, this court is “ ‘bound to follow’ the California Court of Appeal’s interpretation of California law ‘absent convincing evidence that the California Supreme Court would reject the interpretation.’ ” California Pro-Life Council v. Getman, 328 F.3d 1088 , 1099 (9th Cir.2003) (quoting In re Watts, 298 F.3d 1077, 1082 (9th Cir.2002)).