China North Industries Tianjin Corp. v. Grand Field Co.

Good Law
197 F. App'x 543
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 3, 2006No. 04-56323California403 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Grand Field Co., Inc. appeals the district court’s order remanding China North Industries Tianjin Corp.’s suit to enforce a foreign arbitration award to the San Bernardino County Superior Court. We have jurisdiction despite 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (d) because the district court’s order was based *544 on its interpretation of a “forum selection clause.” See Pelleport Investors, Inc. v. Budco Quality Theatres, Inc., 741 F.2d 273, 276-77 (9th Cir.1984).

There is no question that Grand Field had the right to remove this action at anytime before trial under the New York Convention. 1 9 U.S.C. § 205 . We disagree that the parties’ stipulation is a “forum selection clause” in the sense of selecting a state, rather than a federal, forum. It does select a specific forum — the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) — for arbitration of the parties’ underlying dispute about whether Grand Field owed China North money. However, the stipulation does not say that the San Bernardino County Superior Court is the only forum where disputes about an award, if any, will be resolved. That the San Bernardino County Superior Court may have jurisdiction over the…

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.