Not for Publication United States Court of Appeals
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED AUG 28 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS EHM PRODUCTIONS, INC., DBA TMZ, a No. 19-55288 California corporation; WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC., a Delaware D.C. No. corporation, 2:16-cv-02001-SJO-GJS Plaintiffs-Appellees, MEMORANDUM* v. STARLINE TOURS OF HOLLYWOOD, INC., a California corporation, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted August 10, 2020 Pasadena, California Before: WARDLAW and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges, and HILLMAN,** District Judge. Starline Tours of Hollywood, Inc. (Starline) appeals the district court’s * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Timothy Hillman, United States District Judge for the District of Massachusetts, sitting by designation. orders dismissing its First Amended Counterclaim (FACC) and denying its motion for leave to amend. We dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. 1. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, the courts of appeals have jurisdiction over “final decisions of the district court.” Nat’l Distrib. Agency v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 117 F.3d 432, 433 (9th Cir. 1997). Generally, “a voluntary dismissal without prejudice is ordinarily not a final judgment from which the plaintiff may appeal.” Galaza v. Wolf, 954 F.3d 1267, 1270 (9th Cir. 2020) (cleaned up). A limited exception to this rule—which Starline seeks to invoke—permits an appeal “when a party that has suffered an adverse partial judgment subsequently dismisses its remaining claims without prejudice with the approval of the district court, and the record reveals no evidence of intent to manipulate our appellate jurisdiction.” James v.
[Show full text]