Vernon Vu Luong v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 368 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
Vernon Vu Luong v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 368 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
9 citation events (9 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Poseley (ca9, 2008-02-20)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Poseley
9th Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
See U.S.S.G. § 5G1.2(d); United States v. Iniguez, 368 F.3d 1113, 1116-17 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc).
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Iniguez
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
MEMORANDUM ** Cruz Iniguez appeals the sentence imposed on remand from this court’s decision in United States v. Iniguez, 368 F.3d 1113, 1117 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Zidar
9th Cir. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Iniguez, 368 F.3d 1113, 1116 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Iniguez
9th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Iniguez, 368 F.3d 1113 (2004) (en banc). .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Pershing, L.L.C. v. Thomas Kiebach (2×)
5th Cir. · 2016 · signal: see also · confidence low
Third, the demand approach allows “the district court to exercise jurisdiction coextensive with the diversity jurisdiction that would have otherwise been present if the case had been litigated rather than arbitrated.” Id. at 884 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Luong v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 356 F.3d 1188, 1197-98 (9th Cir. 2004) (Kozinski, J., dissenting), opinion withdrawn, 368 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2004). 5 In essence, 5 “The absurdity of the [award approach] can be demonstrated by considering the following example: X claims Y owes him $100,000 in a contrac…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Vernon Vu LUONG, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., Respondent-Appellee
02-56522.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
May 25, 2004.
368 F.3d 1113
Mai D. Wells, Esq., Anaheim, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant., Rex Darrell Berry, Esq., Livingston & Mattesich, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Fernandez, Kozinski, Rymer.
Published

ORDER WITHDRAWING OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed on January 30, 2004, and published at 356 F.3d 1188 (9th Circ. 2004), is withdrawn. With the opinion withdrawn, the petition for rehearing en banc is moot. The parties may file a renewal of the petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc upon the filing of a new decision by the court.