Case ID: f-appx_3/html/0640-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Noel T. BENOIST, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FAST DRAW PRODUCTIONS INC.; Tristar Productions Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 99-16025.
    D.C. No. CV-97-166-RCC.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.
    
    Decided Feb. 21, 2001.
    Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      . The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument and denies Benoist's request for oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Noel T. Benoist appeals pro se the order of the district court dismissing his action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for failure to comply -with a prior order to proceed to contractual arbitration. Because the district court clearly intended its May 3, 1999 order to operate as a final adjudication, we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See Nevada v. Burford, 918 F.2d 854, 855 (9th Cir.1990). We review for abuse of discretion, see Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1384 (9th Cir.1996), and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its May 3,1999 order.

AFFIRMED. 
      
      . This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.