A&O Shearman | U.S. International Arbitration Digest
U.S. International Arbitration Digest
This links to the home page

US International Arbitration Digest

A centralized resource for newly released decisions issued by US courts

The US IA Digest collects in one place important decisions on US international arbitration case law issued since January 1, 2016, compiled and organized into categories that are most relevant and useful to practitioners and other interested parties. The Digest will be updated on a rolling basis as new decisions are issued.

Newly Released Decisions

Vitol, Inc. v. Copape Produtos de Petróleo LTDA, No. 22-CV-10569-JPC (S.D.N.Y. June 13, 2024)

Court granted stay pending arbitration and denied respondent’s motion to dismiss in accordance with the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Smith v. Spizzirri.


LAG Oasis, LLC v. Independent Specialty Insurance Co., No. 23-CV-06584-NJB-DPC (E.D. La. June 13, 2024)

Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and stay litigation, but denied the motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Smith v. Spizzirri.  Court concluded, in line with Fifth Circuit’s precedent, that where the arbitration agreement was housed within a broader insurance contract, the arbitration clause need not be signed by the parties to satisfy the requirements of the FAA and NY Convention.  Court further did not consider the arbitration clause to be against public policy.


Risen Energy Co. v. Focus Futura Holdings Participacoes S.A., No. 23-CV-10993-LGS (S.D.N.Y. June 11, 2024)

Court granted respondent’s motion to confirm arbitral award, but denied respondent’s request for attorneys’ fees relating to post-arbitration litigation where the parties’ arbitration agreements did not provide for such relief.


Gem Yield Bahamas Ltd. v. Mullen Technologies, Inc., No. 24-CV-01120-KPF (S.D.N.Y. June 11, 2024)

Court granted petitioners’ motion for summary judgment and confirmed the interim measures award issued during the liability phase of a bifurcated arbitration.  Court denied respondents’ motion to vacate the award, concluding that the arbitrator did not exceed their authority and that the award was not rendered in manifest disregard of the law.


The Cherokee Nation v. OptumRX, Inc., No. 23-CV-00259-RAW-GLJ (E.D. Okla. May 8, 2024)

Court recommended that defendants’ motion to stay the litigation pending arbitration should be granted pursuant to § 3 of the FAA.  Court’s recommendation was based on clear evidence that the parties delegated the issue of arbitrability to the arbitrator, and thus that challenges to the arbitration provision’s enforceability must be resolved by the arbitrator. Accordingly, questions as to the tribal nation’s waiver of its sovereign immunity, whether the arbitration provision was unconscionable, and whether the Recovery Act precluded arbitration must be resolved by the arbitrator.


Pott v. World Capital Properties, Ltd., 21-CV-23942-JAL (S.D. Fla. Mar. 19, 2024)

Court recommended the recognition and enforcement of the parties’ foreign arbitral award and found that respondent’s motion to dismiss should be denied.  Court found no applicable exception for non-recognition under the Panama Convention, where respondent raised arguments already determined by arbitration and tribunal provided respondent due process.