Case Name: SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-08-13
Citations: 341 F. App'x 707
Docket Number: No. 07-5190-cv
Parties: SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Present: ROBERT A. KATZMANN, B.D. PARKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 341
Pages: 707–709

Head Matter:
SOMPO JAPAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-5190-cv.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Aug. 13, 2009.
Thomas M. Eagan (David T. Maloof, of counsel), Maloof Browne & Eagan LLC, Rye, NY, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Barry N. Gutterman, Barry N. Gutter-man & Associates, P.C., New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.
Present: ROBERT A. KATZMANN, B.D. PARKER, Circuit Judges.
. The Honorable Sonia Sotomayor, originally a member of the panel, was elevated to the Supreme Court on August 8, 2009. The two remaining members of the panel, who are in agreement, have determined the matter. See 28 U.S.C. 46(d); Local Rule 0.14(2); United States v. Desimone, 140 F.3d 457 (2d Cir. 1998).

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company ("Union Pacific") appeals from an judgment entered October 23, 2007, granting plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. We assume the parties' familiarity with the facts, procedural history, and specification of issues on appeal.
On appeal, Union Pacific argues, in effect, that our prior decision in Sompo Japan Insurance Co. of America v. Union Pacific Railraod Co. ("Sompo I"), 456 F.3d 54 (2d Cir.2006), was wrongly decided and should be vacated. However, "[t]his court is bound by a decision of a prior panel unless and until its rationale is overruled, implicitly or expressly, by the Supreme Court or this court en banc." In re Sokolowski, 205 F.3d 532, 534-35 (2d Cir.2000) (per curiam) (alteration in original and internal quotation marks omitted). Union Pacific points to no intervening Supreme Court decision that would call into question the rationale of Sompo I. Therefore, we are bound by the prior precedent of this Court. For the foregoing reasons, the amended judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.