
    DONALDSON BROS. READY MIX, INC., a Montana corporation; Charles F. Donaldson; Catherine L. Donaldson; Thomas Simpson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PHENNEGER & MORGAN, INC., a Washington corporation, Defendant-third-party-plaintiff-Appellee, v. McLucas and Associates, Inc.; Glenda McLucas, Third-party-defendant-Appellees.
    No. 08-35912.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted Nov. 5, 2009.
    Filed Nov. 16, 2009.
    Donald C. Robinson, Esquire, Cynthia L. Walker, Esquire, Poore, Roth & Robinson, P.C., Butte, MT, Marc Schechter, Esquire, Susan Meter, Esquire, Elizabeth Sales, Esquire, Butterfield Schechter, LLP, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
    Robert J. Phillips, Esquire, Jack Jenks, Esquire, Phillips & Bohyer, P.C., Missoula, MT, for Defendant-third-party-plaintiff-Appellee.
    Dean A. Stensland, Boone Karlberg, PC, Missoula, MT, for Third-party-defendant-Appellees.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, FISHER and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Donaldson Bros, et al. (“Donaldson”) appeal from the district court’s order granting Phenneger & Morgan, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review is de novo, Mendez v. County of San Bernardino, 540 F.3d 1109, 1123 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

The district court correctly concluded that Donaldson is not entitled to equitable indemnification as a matter of law. Donaldson failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether it was “free from any active negligence contributing to the injury causing accident.” Fletcher v. City of Helena, 163 Mont. 337, 517 P.2d 365, 370 (1973).

Donaldson abandoned on appeal any claim it might have had for indemnification based on breach of a contractual duty.

The district court did not err by granting summary judgment on Donaldson’s entire claim for indemnification. Although a district court may not grant summary judgment on claims not addressed in the motion for summary judgment, Greene v. Solano County Jail, 513 F.3d 982, 990 (9th Cir.2008), the motion need not address all factual allegations potentially relevant to the claim.

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