E & J GALLO WINERY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WD ENERGY SERVICES, INC.; Encana Corporation, Defendants, and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Appellant

E & J GALLO WINERY, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. WD ENERGY SERVICES, INC.; Encana Corporation, Defendants, and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Appellant. No. 05-16689. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 14, 2008 . Filed March 19, 2008. D. Greg Durbin, Esq., McCormick Bar-stow Sheppard Wayte & Carruth, LLP, Fresno, CA, Joseph W. Cotchett, Esq., Barbara Lyons, Esq., Steven N. Williams, Esq., Cotchett Pitre Simon & McCarthy, Burlingame, CA, G. Kip Edwards, Esq., Kings Beach, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee. Richard P. Levy, Esq., Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, William C. Hahesy, Esq., Sagaser Franson & Jones, Fresno, CA, for Defendants and Appellant. Before: RYMER, RAWLINSON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). [MAJORITY] MEMORANDUM Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP appeals a district court order requiring it to pay a $10,000 sanction to the court and $92,078.97 in costs to E & J Gallo Winery after a finding of bad faith and vexatious conduct relating to its extrajudicial interference with a third-party deposition. The sanctions payable to the district court are not immediately appealable. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because there is no final order. Stanley v. Woodford, 449 F.3d 1060, 1065 (9th Cir.2006). DISMISSED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.