Case ID: f-appx_75/html/0687-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BIG FAT FISH, INC., a Nevada Corporation Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Paul T. LOCKE, an individual; Carl Lambert, an individual Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 03-55406.
    D.C. No. CV-02-07360-JFW.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Sept. 19, 2003.
    Robert D. Fish, Rutan & Tucker, LLP, Costa Mesa, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Paul T. Locke, Paul L. Locke Law Offices, Santa Monica, CA, for DefendantsAppellees.
    Before PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Big Fat Fish, Inc. (“BFF”) appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice BFF’s action alleging RICO violations, securities fraud, and malpractice. We dismiss.

OFF contends that the district court erred by dismissing its action pursuant to a settlement agreement because the parties had not reached a settlement. The only evidence in the record of a settlement is a stipulation indicating that the parties agreed to an outline of a settlement. Furthermore, the district court’s order states that it will retain jurisdiction for sixty days to enforce the terms of the settlement. We lack jurisdiction because it appears the district court anticipated further proceedings. See National Distrib. Agency v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 117 F.3d 432, 433 (9th Cir.1997) (noting that a final ruling must “clearly evidence[] the judge’s intention that it be the court’s final act in the matter”).

DISMISSED. 
      
       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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.