U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2008

Payne v. Anvil Knitwear Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided September 15, 2008

293 F. App'x 475

Counsel

Lucretia M. Payne, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiffs-counter-defendants-Appellants., James D. Weinberger, Esq., Fross, Zel-nick, Lehrman & Zissu, New York, NY, Christopher C. Larkin, Seyfarth Shaw, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-counter-claimant-Appellee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Kaseberg v. Conaco, LLC (United States District Court for the Southern District of California 2017)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants’ motion to correct typographical errors is granted. The Clerk shall file the amended response to the order to show cause received on July 21, 2008.

A review of the record and appellants’ response to the order to show cause indi*476cates that the questions raised in these appeals are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 698 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s August 15, 2007 judgment, all orders preceding the final judgment, and the August 29, 2007 order denying the motion to reopen the case.

All other pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.