Trustees of the U.a. Local 38 Defined Benefit Pension Plan v. Trustees of the Plumbers and Pipe Fitters National Pension Fund

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TRUSTEES OF THE U.A. LOCAL 38
DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
TRUSTEES OF THE PLUMBERS AND
PIPE FITTERS NATIONAL PENSION
FUND,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 16-15228
D.C. No. 4:15-cv-04703-YGR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 13, 2016**
San Francisco, California
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Trustees of the U.A. Local 38 Defined Benefit Pension Plan (“Local 38”)
appeal the district court’s denial of its motion to vacate the arbitrator’s award and
FILED
DEC 23 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

the district court’s confirmation of the arbitration awards. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The parties proceeded to arbitration after the arbitrator found that the
preconditions to arbitration had been met. The parties stipulated that if the
arbitrator found liability, and the parties could not agree on the amount due, the
arbitrator “would retain jurisdiction” to decide the amount due. This stipulation
controls, and the arbitrator did not exceed his authority by determining that
Pension Protection Act (PPA) contributions were part of the amount Local 38
owed.
The arbitrator did not manifestly disregard the law by determining that PPA
contributions were part of “Employer Contributions” that must be remitted under
the terms of the United Association Pension Fund Reciprocal Agreement. There is
no “well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable” law that bars PPA contributions
from being reciprocated. Collins v. D.R. Horton, Inc., 505 F.3d 874, 880 (9th Cir.
2007) (emphasis removed) (quoting Carter v. Health Net of Cal., Inc., 374 F.3d
830, 838 (9th Cir. 2004)). The arbitrator could not, therefore, have manifestly
disregarded the law. See id. at 879–80.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --