NO T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
B ANK OF M ONTREAL, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. FR EDERIC K

SC OTT SALYER , a s Truste e for the Sc ott Sa ly e r R e voc a ble Trust, a nd in his individua

l c a pa c ity , R

e sponde n t - Appe lla nt,
a nd SK FOODS LLC , De fe nda

nt. No. 12-16983 D.C t. No. 5:11-mc -80133-EJD
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Edwa rd J. Da vila , Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Argue d and Subm i tte d Nove m

be r 21, 2014 San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia 

# F IL ED
APR 06 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U

. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.B e fore : R

AW LINSON a

n d FR IEDLAND, C irc uit Judge s , a n d M AR SHALL, Se nior Distric t Judge
. ** Appe lla nt Fre d e ric k Sc ott Sa ly e r (Sa ly e r) c ha lle nge s the distric t c ourt’ s de nia l of a

re que st to tra

n sfe r the a c tion to ba

nkruptc y c ourt, de nia l of a

sta y , a nd
am e ndm e nt of a

judgm e nt to a d d Sa ly e r and his trust a s judgm e nt de btors. The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in deny ing Sa ly e r’ s re que st to transfe r the a c tion to ba

nkruptc y c ourt. The distric t

c o urt prope rly

he l d tha t the first-to-file rule did not pre c lude am e ndm e nt of the judgm e nt be c a use the
c onsolida te d ba nkruptc y a c t ion did not dire c tly involve SK Foods, LLC . Give n the diffe re nc e in pa

rtie s, it wa s not c le ar whe the r am e nding thejudgm e nt would a ffe c t the d e btor, so thedistric t c ourt wa s justifie d in que stioning the ba nkruptc y c ourt’ s jurisdic tion. Se e C

e dars-Sinai Med. C

tr. v . Shalala , 125 F.3d 765, 769 (9th C ir. 1997) (de c lining to a

pply the first-to-file rule whe re the “ issue s [we re ] distinc t, [and] the re quire m e nt of ide ntity of the issue s [wa s] not m e t” ). The distric t c ourt a c te d within its disc re tion in deny ing a sta

y pre m ise d on Sa ly e r’ s pa

ra lle l c rim ina l proc e e dings be c a use Sa l y e r fa ile d

to de m onstra

te tha t his Fifth Am e ndm e nt rights would be im plic ate d by

am e ndm e nt of the judgm e nt. Se e K e ating v . Offic e of Thrift Superv ision , 45 F.3d 322, 324 (9th C ir. 1995) (“ In

** The Honora

ble C onsue lo B . M a

rsha ll, Se nior Distric t Judge for the U.S. Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia , sitting by de signa tion. 2the a

bse nc e of substa

ntia l pre judic e to the rights of thepa rtie s involve d, sim ulta n e ous pa ra lle l c ivil a

nd c rim ina l proc e e dings a re unobje c tiona

ble unde r our jurisprude nc e . . . .” ) (c ita tion a nd a lte rations omitte d). The distric t c ourt did not c le arly e rr in a m e nding thejudgm e nt to a dd Sa ly e r
and the Sc ott Sa ly e r R e voc a ble Trust a s SK Foods, LLC ’ s a lte r e gos. The
unc onte s te d e vide nc e am

ply de m onstra

te d the “ unity

of inte re st a

nd owne rship” be twe e n SK Foods, LLC and Sa ly e r re quire d for an a lte r e g o finding. Hasso v
. Hapk e , 227 C a l. App. 4th 107, 156 (2014), as modified
. The re c ord a lso re fle c ts that Sa ly e r “ ha d c ontrol of thelitiga tion a nd oc c a sion to c onduc t it with a dilige n c e
c orre sponding to the risk of pe rsona l lia bility tha t wa s involve d.” K

atzir’s Floor & HomeDe sign, Inc
. v . M-MLS.c om , 394 F.3d 1143, 1150 (9th C ir. 2004) (c ita tion
om i tte d); se e also Toho-Towa C o., Ltd. v . Morgan C

r e e k Prods., Inc

. , 217 C a l. App. 4th 1096, 1110 (2013) (holding tha t the a lte r e go c ontrolle d the litiga tion be c a use “ [t] he re wa s no showing be low, a nd the re is not the

slighte st sugge stion in the b rie fs of a

p pe l la nts, tha t a ny one , othe r tha

n the a lte r e go, ha d

c ontrol of the litiga tion. . . .” ) (c ita

tion a nd a lte ration omitte d). AFFIRM E D.

3