NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRADLEY SAYRE, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.; JP MORGAN 

CHASE SECURITIES, LLC; J.P. 

MORGAN SECURITIES, LLC; DOES, 1-

10, 

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 18-55411 

D.C. No. 3:17-cv-00449-JLS-MDD 

MEMORANDUM*

BRADLEY SAYRE, 

Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES, LLC, 

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 18-55412 

D.C. No. 3:17-cv-02285-JLS-MDD

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted October 15, 2019 

San Diego, California

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

FILED

OCT 24 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Before: HURWITZ, OWENS, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

Bradley Sayre appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to vacate 

an arbitration award and dismissing his amended complaint. We review the denial 

of vacatur and the dismissal ruling de novo, and review factual findings underlying 

that ruling for clear error. See Woods v. Saturn Distribution Corp., 78 F.3d 424, 427 

(9th Cir. 1996); Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1030 

(9th Cir. 2008). We reverse.

1. Judicial review of an arbitration award is “both limited and highly 

deferential.” Aspic Eng'g & Constr. Co. v. ECC Centcom Constructors LLC, 913 

F.3d 1162, 1166 (9th Cir. 2019) (quoting Comedy Club, Inc. v. Improv W. Assocs., 

553 F.3d 1277, 1288 (9th Cir. 2009)). “Neither erroneous legal conclusions nor 

unsubstantiated factual findings justify federal court review[.]” Id. (quoting Bosack 

v. Soward, 586 F.3d 1096, 1102 (9th Cir. 2009)). An award may be vacated, 

however, due to “the arbitrary denial of a reasonable request for postponement.” 

Sheet Metal Workers Int’l. Ass’n Local Union No. 420 v. Kinney Air Conditioning

Co., 756 F.2d 742, 746 (9th Cir. 1985); see 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(3).

This case presents one of the rare instances where an arbitration award must 

be vacated due to the arbitration panel’s arbitrary denial of a reasonable request for 

postponement. The arbitration panel denied Sayre’s counsel’s request for a 

continuance, even though it is undisputed that he had a medical emergency. At the 
3 

time of the continuance request, only half a day of a scheduled nine-day arbitration 

hearing had been completed and only a single witness had testified. After denying 

postponement, the panel proceeded in Sayre’s counsel’s absence, admitting exhibits 

into evidence and hearing only the defense’s closing argument. The panel then

summarily denied Sayre’s claims without articulating how it could have rendered a 

“comprehensive evaluation” based on only a portion of Sayre’s case-in-chief and 

without addressing why it could not have granted a continuance at least for the three 

days for which the doctor had placed Sayre’s counsel off work. 

Because the panel arbitrarily denied Sayre’s reasonable request for 

postponement, see Sheet Metal Workers, 756 F.2d at 746, we reverse and vacate the 

arbitration award.

2. Res judicata bars claims if an earlier suit: (1) involved the same claims; (2) 

“reached a final judgment on the merits”; and (3) “involved identical parties or 

privies.” Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 2005)

(quoting Sidhu v. Flecto Co., 279 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir. 2002)). Since the 

arbitration award is vacated, it is no longer a “final judgment on the merits” and 

therefore has no res judicata effect on Sayre’s amended complaint. See id. 

Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal of the amended complaint.

REVERSED.
Sayre v. JPMorgan, No. 18-55411, 18-55412

OWENS, Circuit Judge, dissenting:

I respectfully dissent. In light of all the circumstances before the arbitration 

panel—including Sayre’s last-minute announcement that he would be unavailable 

for 12 weeks—and the extremely deferential standard of review accorded to an 

arbitration panel’s decision, I cannot say the district court erred by denying Sayre’s 

motion to vacate the arbitration award.

FILED

OCT 24 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS