
    Jaco VAN MAANEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF THE NATIONS, INC., dba YWAM-University of the Nations and Does, 1-10, Defendants-Appellees, and Youth With A Mission International, Inc., DBA YWAM-Office of The Founders and Youth With A Mission-Bishop, Defendants.
    No. 12-15515.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted Oct. 9, 2013.
    Filed Oct. 15, 2013.
    William Joseph Cremer, I, Heather Kingery, Esquire, Edmund J. Siegert, Cremer Spina Shaughnessy Jansen & Sie-gert, LLC, Chicago, IL, Timothy Vergil Magill, Magill Law Offices, Fresno, CA, Mark McCormick, I, Esquire, Belin McCormick, P.C., Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Kathryn Jean Burke, Esquire, Michael Joseph Vartain, Vartain Law Group, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: D.W. NELSON, M. SMITH, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Jaco van Maanen appeals the district court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the University of the Nations (University) on van Maanen’s claim of ostensible agency under California law. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

The evidence in the record does not establish any genuine dispute of material fact suggesting that van Maanen relied on a belief that Youth With a Mission-Bishop (YWAM-Bishop) was the agent of the University when he decided to enroll in the SOAR course. See Cal. Civ.Code § 2300; Associated Creditors’ Agency v. Davis, 13 Cal.3d 374, 399, 118 Cal.Rptr. 772, 530 P.2d 1084 (1975). Van Maanen testified that he relied on the inclusion of the YWAM-Bishop SOAR course as part of the University course catalog because it informed him that the course was part of the YWAM movement and complied with YWAM’s values. But Van Maanen did not identify any other reason why the inclusion of the SOAR course in the University was important to him. Cf. J.L. v. Children’s Institute, Inc., 177 Cal.App.4th 388, 403-04, 99 Cal.Rptr.3d 5 (2009). Accordingly, there is no evidence that in making his decision to enroll in the SOAR course van Maanen relied on the ability of the University to exercise control over YWAM-Bishop. Cf. Kaplan v. Coldwell Banker Residential Affiliates, Inc., 59 Cal.App.4th 741, 744-48, 69 Cal.Rptr.2d 640 (1997); Beck v. Arthur Murray, Inc., 245 Cal.App.2d 976, 977-78, 54 Cal.Rptr. 328 (1966).

AFFIRMED. 
      
      
         This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     