GRUPO ALTEX S.A. DE C.V. V. GOWAN CO., No. 18-16894 (9th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FEB 13 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GRUPO ALTEX SA DE CV; FREXPORT SA DE CV, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-16894 D.C. No. 2:17-cv-03830-GMS Plaintiffs-Appellants, MEMORANDUM* v. GOWAN COMPANY; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona G. Murray Snow, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 7, 2020** Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona Before: TASHIMA, HURWITZ, and MILLER, Circuit Judges. Grupo Altex S.A. de C.V. and Frexport S.A. de C.V. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) appeal the dismissal of their complaint against Gowan Company, LLC, Gowan Mexican Holding Company, LLC, and JRJ Partners, LLC (collectively, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). “Defendants”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. Defendants’ motion to dismiss included a declaration and documents showing that they were not the parties that caused Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries. See Safe Air for Everyone v. Meyer, 373 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2004). Despite having the opportunity to submit evidence in response, Plaintiffs expressly chose to rest on their pleadings. Plaintiffs do the same on appeal, but unverified allegations in pleadings do not suffice to rebut contrary evidence. Leite v. Crane Co., 749 F.3d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir. 2014); Lew v. Kona Hosp., 754 F.2d 1420, 1423 (9th Cir. 1985). Plaintiffs also urge that the district court erred in not providing discovery, but because they never sought discovery in the district court, they cannot raise the issue for the first time on appeal. See Robinson v. Am. Home Mortg. Servicing, Inc. (In re Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc.), 754 F.3d 772, 780 (9th Cir. 2014). On this record, the district court did not err in dismissing the complaint. AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.