Rossi v. Purvis
- Pitts
- 5:23-cv-04148
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Rossi v. Purvis, Judge Pitts dismissed the case without prejudice after plaintiffs did not start court-ordered arbitration.
StormQuant and Edward Rossi, who brought the case, and Reuben Timothy Purvis III, Heather Purvis, and the LLC established by the Purvises, who were defendants.
What happened
StormQuant and Edward Rossi sued Reuben Timothy Purvis III, Heather Purvis, and an LLC established by the Purvises. The dispute involved a Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement.
On July 24, 2024, the court ordered the parties to proceed with arbitration and stayed the case while arbitration was pending. Fourteen months later, plaintiffs had not started arbitration, and defendants asked the court to dismiss the case. Plaintiffs did not oppose the request.
The court dismissed the case without prejudice. Judge P. Casey Pitts relied on the court’s discretion under the arbitration law and a Supreme Court decision concerning stays pending arbitration.
The detailed version
- Rossi v. Purvis · No. 5:23-cv-04148
- Pitts
- Sept. 10, 2025
Background
StormQuant and Edward Rossi sued StormQuant’s former CEO, Reuben Timothy Purvis III, his wife, Heather Purvis, and an LLC established by the Purvises. The case concerned the parties’ Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement.
Prior arbitration order
On July 24, 2024, the court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. It ordered the parties to proceed with arbitration under the agreement’s terms. At defendants’ request, the court also stayed the case pending arbitration under 9 U.S.C. § 3.
Dismissal
The opinion states that plaintiffs had not initiated arbitration during the following fourteen months. Defendants then requested dismissal, and plaintiffs did not oppose that request. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the case without prejudice. The order does not decide the underlying dispute on its merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.