171045P.pdf   01/02/2018  Scott Seldin  v.  Theodore Seldin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  17-1045
                          and No:  17-1047
   U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha   
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Benton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Civil Procedure. A Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss for lack 
   of subject matter jurisdiction is not the appropriate mechanism to use to 
   attempt to compel arbitration, as an arbitration agreement alone, without 
   other statutory or binding jurisdictional limitations, does not divest the 
   federal courts of subject matter jurisdiction - See City of Benkelman v. 
   Baseline Eng'g Corp., 867 F.3d 875 (8th Cir. 2017) - and the district 
   court erred in dismissing the action based on that argument; the district 
   court erred when it found, in the alternative, that res judicata and 
   collateral estoppel were sufficient grounds to grant the Rule 12(b)(1) 
   motion; the appropriate mechanisms for dismissal based on preclusion or 
   because of a pending arbitration should be either a Rule 56 motion or a 
   12(b)(6) motion.