Under 9 USC 4, the district court must hold a summary jury trial if a party timely demands a jury and the district court finds, on a motion to compel arbitration, that there are disputed issues of fact as to whether the plaintiff entered into or is otherwise bound by an arbitration clause. Here, the district court so found, but instead of holding a prompt jury trial on the disputed factual issues, entered an order denying the motion to compel “without prejudice.” This decision holds that the order, though non-final and entered simply to clear the district court’s calendar, is appealable under 9 USC 16. However, it also holds that there is nothing to review since no determination had been made of the disputed factual issues which could not be resolved for the first time on appeal without depriving the plaintiff of his right to a jury trial. So, the decision vacates the appealed order and remands for a prompt jury trial.