After careful consideration, we conclude that this Court does have jurisdiction of this appeal. We also conclude that the district court erred in dismissing Zokaites’ claims with prejudice. The agreement to submit claims to arbitration was limited to disputes relating to the distribution of the remaining proceeds from CalAmp and the distribution of proceeds from the sale of the remaining assets. Of course, if the distributions from the Escrow Agreement (which of course may involve issues that have to be arbitrated) are sufficient to pay Zokaites’ claims in full, then the remaining claims in the court proceeding may well be moot. On the other hand, if Zokaites is not thus paid in full, he should be permitted to litigate his claims in the court proceeding, including in particular his claims based upon the personal guarantee of Moses.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.