Case ID: f-appx_321/html/0700-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK, LTD., Plaintiff-counter-defendant-Appellee, v. Moshe SCHNAPP, an individual, Defendant-counter-claimant-Appellant.
    No. 07-56318.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted Feb. 9, 2009.
    Filed April 10, 2009.
    
      Ronald F. Frank, Esquire, Bannan, Green, Frank & Terzian, LLP, Los Ange-les, CA, Kevin C. McCann, Esquire, Sean D. Unger, Esquire, Paul Hastings Janof-sky & Walker, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Plaintiff-counter-defendant-Appellee.
    Paul M. Kelley, Esquire, Donfeld, Kelley & Rollman, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-counter-claimant-Appellant.
    Before: KLEINFELD, BEA, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

The district court did not err by ruling on Israel Discount Bank Ltd.’s motion to dismiss Moshe Schnapp’s counterclaim for forum non conveniens before determining whether it had jurisdiction. See Sinochem Int'l Co. v. Malay. Int’l Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422, 425, 127 S.Ct. 1184, 167 L.Ed.2d 15 (2007). The district court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed Schnapp’s counterclaim and remanded the remainder of the case to state court. Leetsch v. Freedman, 260 F.3d 1100, 1102 (9th Cir.2001). Therefore, the district court’s order is affirmed.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.