Golisano

MEMORANDUM **

The Business Office, Inc. appeals the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment against it, which resulted in the dismissal of a number of its claims. Rapid Payroll, Inc. cross-appeals the district court’s judgment against it.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . A grant of summary judgment by a district court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 is reviewed de novo. James River Ins. Co. v. Hebert Schenck, P.C., 523 F.3d 915, 920 (9th Cir. 2008).

We agree with The Business Office that the district court should not have granted summary judgment against it with respect to its claim of tortious interference with contractual relations. As to this, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. The Business Office came forward with sufficient evidence from which a trier of fact could conclude that the Paychex defendants acted for improper reasons and not to protect its legitimate interests. See Accuchex Corp. v. Paychex, Inc., No. B 183920, 2006 WL 2280182 , at * 6 (Cal.Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2006).

*580 The Business Office further argues that the district court erred in granting Rapid Payroll, Paychex, Golisano and Turek partial summary judgment…