Mary Csanyi v. Supercuts

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARY CSANYI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SUPERCUTS,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
REGIS CORPORATION,
Defendant.
No. 09-15912
D.C. No. 2:03-cv-01987-JAT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Mary Csanyi appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment awarding her
FILED
OCT 06 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-15912 2
damages on her claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”)
following our remand vacating the district court’s judgment for defendant
Supercuts on this claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
for clear error the district court’s computation of damages, Amantea-Cabrera v.
Potter, 279 F.3d 746, 750 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.
The district court did not clearly err in its calculation of damages based on
the evidence presented at the bench trial. See 29 U.S.C. § 2617(a)(1)(A) (setting
forth damages available under the FMLA).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that a second
trial on damages was not warranted. See Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Pfeifer,
462 U.S. 523, 551 (1983) (“On remand, the decision on whether to reopen the
record [on damages] should be left to the sound discretion of the trial court.”).
Csanyi’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --