⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit hears argument in Bandy v. Move, Inc. The core legal issue before the panel is whether a district court's order compelling arbitration and dismissing the case without prejudice is immediately appealable, or whether the court's statements about retaining jurisdiction and allowing parties to return mean the order was functionally a stay — which would not be appealable. The threshold question looms large: does this panel even have jurisdiction to hear the appeal? Beyond that jurisdictional puzzle lies the merits: did the parties form a binding contract that includes an arbitration clause? The plaintiffs allege the agreement was made entirely over the telephone, while the defendant points to a subsequent email containing terms and conditions with an arbitration provision. The case raises fundamental questions about contract formation, mutual assent, and when a later writing can bind parties to terms never discussed in an oral agreement. The Federal Arbitration Act hovers over the argument, with its language about stays versus dismissals, and the degree of proof required to compel arbitration.

Bandy v. Move, Inc. (No. 25-2095) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 6, 2026.