SHARMA v. SUBWAY REAL ESTATE LLC (2020)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Vishal SHARMA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUBWAY REAL ESTATE, LLC, et al. Defendants-Appellees.

No. 19-15436

Decided: February 10, 2020

Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

Vishal Sharma, Pro Se Sallie Armstrong, Attorney, McDonald Carano, LLP, Reno, NV, David Roth, Wiggin & Dana LLP, New Haven, CT, for Defendants - Appellees

MEMORANDUM **

Vishal Sharma appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his diversity action alleging claims related to a franchise agreement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Sharma’s action because the claims Sharma alleged were subject to arbitration. See Sparling v. Hoffman Constr. Co., 864 F.2d 635, 638 (9th Cir. 1988) (district court may dismiss an action where the claims alleged are subject to arbitration).

We reject as meritless Sharma’s contention that appellees should be held in contempt of court.

We do not consider documents not filed with the district court. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990).

Appellees’ opposed motion to amend the caption is granted. The Clerk is directed to amend the caption on the docket to replace “Doctor’s Associates, Inc.” with “Doctor’s Associates, Inc. n/k/a Doctor’s Associates, LLC.”

Sharma’s opposed motion to file a supplemental brief is denied.

AFFIRMED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network