112203P.pdf   03/05/2012  Continental Holdings, Inc.  v.  Crown Holdings Incorporated
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  11-2203
   U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha   
   [PUBLISHED] [Bye, Author, with Smith and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
   Civil Case - diversity. Parties to a stock purchase agreement disputed
   the indemnity provision in concurrent arbitration and judicial
   proceedings. The district court's grant of summary judgment concluding
   that it was bound by arbitrator's interpretation. The district court
   amended it judgment and denied a motion to reconsider that amendment.
   Concluding the amendment affects substantial rights, the amendment is
   vacated. Because the same issue was before the arbitrator and the court,
   because Continental could have argued its indemnity obligations for
   occupational exposure claims in the environmental arbitration, and
   because the arbitrator's characterization of both interpretations as
   plausible did not make the provision ambiguous, Continental failed to
   meet its burden of proving it was not afforded a full and fair opportunity
   to litigate the meaning of the provision in the arbitration. The district
   court thus correctly determined issue preclusion barred the district court
   from considering the issue.