T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T T H E E R E C T I O N C O M P A N Y , I N C ., a W a s hi ngt on c orpor a t i on, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. W & W S T E E L , L L C , a D el aw ar e l i m i t ed l i ab i l i ty co m p an y, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 11- 35949 D . C . N o . 3 : 1 1 -cv -0 0 8 0 5 -JE ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon J ohn J e l de rks , M a gi s tr a t e J udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 7, 2013

P or t l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: T A S H IM A , C L IF T O N , an d B E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T h e E r e c tio n C o m p a n y ( T E C ) ap p e a ls th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s d e n ia l o f its pe t i t i on t o c om pe l a rbi tr a t i on a nd gr a ntof W & W S t e e l ’ s ( W & W ) m ot i on f or pa r t i a l s um m a ry j udgm e nt . T he F e de r a l A rbi tr a t i on A c ta uthor i z e s a n appe a l f r om 

# FI LED MA R 21 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

a n or de rde ny i ng ape t i t i on t o c om pe l a rbi tr a t i on, 9 U . S . C . § 16( a ) ( 1) ( C ) , a nd the d is tr ic t c o u r t c e r tif

ie d its p a r tia l s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t a s af in a l ju d g m e n t, se e F e d. R . C i v . P . 5 4 ( b ) . We th e r e f o r e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U. S . C . § 1 2 9 1 , a n d we a f f i rm. 1. T E C ’ s a rgum entthatthe part i es ent er ed i nt o a contra ctw hi ch cont ai ned a n a rbi tr a t i on c l aus e f

a i l s . W & W une qui voc a l l y e xpr e s s e d i n i t s J a nua ry 28, 2011, L ett erof Int entthati ti nt ended t o b e bou nd on l y w hen a w ri tt en subcon tra ctw as s ig n e d b y b o th p a r tie s . N o s u c h w r itte n s u b c o n tr a c t w a s e v e rs ig n e d b y b o th part i es . N on ethel es s, T E C ar gu es thatthe part i es ent er ed i nt o a bi nd i ng contra ct throu gh thei r e m ai l com m un i ca t i on s on A pri l 6, 20 11 . T here w as no contra ct f orm e d on A pr i l 6, 2011 be c aus e the r e w a s no m e e t i ng of the m i nds on as e tof te rm s . Se e P hi l l i

ps v . J ohns on , 51 4 P . 2d 13 37 , 13 43 (O r. 19 73 ) ( “ [B ] ef ore there c a n b e av a lid c o n tr a c t th e r e m u s t b e am e e tin g o f th e m in d s a s to a ll o f

its te rm s . . . .” ) . B e c au s e th e p a r tie s d id n o t e n te rin to ac o n tr a c t w h ic h p r o v id e d f o rd is p u te s to b e r es o lv ed th ro u g h arb itra ti o n , th e d istrict co u rt d idn o t errin d en yin g T E C ’s pe t i t i on t o c om pe l a rbi tr a t i on. 2. T E C ha s notr a i s e d atr i abl e i s s ue of m a t e r i a l f

a c ta s t o w he the rthe pa r t i e s f orm e d ac ontr a c tthr ough the i rw or ds a nd c onduc tpr i ort o the A pr i l 6,3

20 11 nego t i at i on s. T he di stri ctcourtthere fore di d n oterr i n g ra nt i ng sum m ary ju d g m e n t to W & W o n T E C ’s b r e a c h o f c o n tr a c t c la im . AF F I RME D.