A collection of the most recent U.S. international arbitration decisions is available here. Decisions can be quickly retrieved by using the filter tools below.
-
Mongoya v. AET MVC Beta, LLC, No. 2:18-CV-08827-MLCF-KWR (E.D. La. Nov. 19, 2018)11/19/2018
Court granted motion to remand to state court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction under the New York Convention, finding that (1) foreign court’s determination that the Convention did not apply was not dispositive, since it was based on fact that foreign country has not enacted the Convention into domestic law, whereas the US has; and (2) parties’ non-signatory status does not affect whether arbitration clause falls under the Convention; but (3) claims asserting defamation arising from statements in enforcement pleadings and seeking injunction against further enforcement proceedings did not relate to the arbitration agreement.
-
Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. M&B Builders Group Inc., No. 1:18-CV-05074-GHW (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 19, 2018)11/19/2018
Court granted petition to confirm arbitration award, finding that there was no indication that the arbitrator’s award was procured through fraud or dishonesty or that the arbitrator was acting in disregard of the Agreement or outside the scope of his broad authority to resolve any dispute between the parties regarding contributions.
-
Sequip Participaçôes S.A. v. Marinho, No. 1:15-MC-23737-JAL (S.D. Fla. Nov. 19, 2018)11/19/2018
Court granted petition to confirm arbitration award, finding that no basis for denying enforcement under the New York Convention existed.
-
Great American Insurance Company v. Nelson, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-02283-TLP-CGC (W.D. Tenn., Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court denied motion to dismiss, finding that defendant had waived its right to assert arbitration by agreeing without reservation to court stipulation that it owed money to plaintiffs.
-
Genosource, LLC v. Inguran, LLC, No. 1:18-CV-00113-CJW-KEM (N.D. Iowa, Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court granted motion for temporary restraining order, rejecting argument that such action was barred by arbitration agreement, since (i) the plaintiff did not sign the arbitration agreement but was alleged to have accepted it through its actions; and (ii) precedent barring preliminary injunctions in actions subject to arbitration did not necessarily apply to temporary restraining orders.
-
Government Employees Insurance Company v. Mayzenberg, No. 1:17-CV-02802-ILG-LB (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court, inter alia, granted temporary stay of defendants’ 180 no-fault insurance collection arbitrations filed against insurer, finding that it would frustrate the purpose of the FAA and judicial economy if the FAA were interpreted to preclude granting stay.
-
Victory Energy Operations, LLC v. Union Carbide Corporation, No. 2:18-CV-00457 (S.D.W. Va. Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court dismissed action in favor of arbitration, finding that, where two contracts governed the parties’ relationship but only one had an arbitration clause, the claims were subject to arbitration because the plaintiffs’ complaint had treated two contracts as “one and the same” and that the claims related to both contracts.
-
Agostino v. Ally Financial Inc., No. 8:18-CV-01202-CEH-TGW (M.D. Fla. Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court denied motion to compel arbitration without prejudice, finding that defendant failed to discharge its burden of proof by failing to provide copies of the agreement to arbitrate and assignment, but that due to federal policy in favor or arbitration, denial would be without prejudice so that defendant could refile.
-
Buckley v. National Football League, No. 1:18-CV-03309-LGS (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that non-signatories were estopped from denying obligation to arbitrate since they accepted benefits under the contract, their claims fall within the scope of the arbitration clause, their challenge to contract formation was to the contract as a whole rather than the arbitration clause specifically, and there was no basis to refuse to enforce the arbitration clause on public policy grounds.
-
Cuevas v. Verizon Wireless Personal Communications, LLP, No. 2:18-CV-00371-UA-CM (M.D. Fla. Nov. 16, 2018)11/16/2018
Court granted motion for reconsideration of a previously denied motion to compel arbitration and upon reconsideration again denied motion to compel arbitration. Court considered defendant’s new basis for enforcing arbitration – a provision that required the parties to resolve disputes by “arbitration, small claims court, or any other means not including jury trials” – and found that, construing ambiguous language against the drafter, this did not require mandatory arbitration.
-
Augustin v. Cubesmart, L.P., No. 0:18-CV-61918-WPD (S.D. Fla. Nov. 15, 2018)11/15/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, or in the alternative, to compel arbitration. Court concluded that plaintiff failed to rebut defendant’s evidence that she electronically received and completed the arbitration agreement.
-
Setty v. Shrinivas Sugandhalaya LLP, No. 2:17-CV-01146-RAJ (W.D. Wash. Nov. 15, 2018)11/15/2018
Court granted motion to stay pending an appeal but denied motion to stay pending the outcome of an arbitration in India. Court reasoned that it was not clear whether all of the claims were subject to arbitration, whether the claims would actually come before the arbitrator, or how the proceedings in India might affect plaintiff’s claims and thus granting a stay would be prejudicial to defendants. Court rejected defendant’s assertion that § 3 of the FAA required a stay when an a separate arbitration proceeding would cover an issue involved in the dispute, clarifying that a stay pending an arbitration is required if it the parties have agreed in writing to arbitrate an issue underlying the proceeding.
-
Great American Insurance Company v. Gemma Power Systems, LLC, No. 1:18-CV-00213-TSB (S.D. Ohio Nov. 15, 2018)11/15/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel intervenor-plaintiff to arbitrate and stayed proceedings of a construction dispute, finding that a valid arbitration provision existed that applied to the dispute. The court determined that an arbitrator should decide whether the requirement that the companies senior officers attempt to settle any dispute prior to arbitration had been met. The court further rejected the intervenor-plaintiff’s argument that Ohio state law should void the arbitration provision based on a forum selection clause outside of Ohio.
-
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers v. JDD, Inc., No. 2:18-CV-00121-GZS (D. Me. Nov. 14, 2018)11/14/2018
Magistrate judge recommended that plaintiff’s motion to vacate an arbitration award based on the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement be denied. Magistrate judge disregarded plaintiff’s argument that the arbitrator had ignored the plain language of the agreement, finding the arbitrator’s interpretation was within his authority.
-
Turnipseed v. APMT, LLC, No. 2:18-CV-05187-CJB-KWR (E.D. La. Nov. 14, 2018)11/14/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of a Fair Housing Act claim. Court found that a valid agreement to arbitrate existed and that there was no conflict with the FHA that would prohibit arbitration. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that a rental real estate contract was beyond Congress’s regulatory powers and not subject to the FAA.
-
Wolf v. Altitude Costa LLC, No. 3:18-CV-01422-WGY (D.P.R. Nov. 14, 2018)11/14/2018
Court dismissed petition to compel arbitration for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court held that a member of an LLC could not sue the LLC on the basis of diversity, and thus the court did not have sufficient jurisdiction to compel arbitration pursuant to chapter 2 of the FAA.
-
Gibbens v. OptumRx, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-00723 (M.D. Tenn. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate and granted defendant’s motion to confirm an arbitration award. The court found that the arbitrator had not manifestly disregarded the law in dismissing a claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, or in finding another claim untimely. Because manifest disregard of the law was the only for vacatur advanced by the plaintiff, the court confirmed the award.
-
The New York City District Council of Carpenters v. Nguyen Custom Woodworking LLC, No. 1:18-CV-03970-AJN (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 13, 2018)
11/13/2018Court granted petitioners unopposed motion to confirm an arbitration award. Court found that an unopposed motion for confirmation of an arbitration award would be treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment and must be granted if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact. Court found that petitioner demonstrated the arbitration was appropriate and that the arbitrator acted within the scope of his authority, and thus petitioner was entitled to confirmation of the award.
-
Wilson v. HUUUGE, Inc., No. 3:18-CV-05276-RBL (W.D. Wash. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a class action to recover money lost through online gambling websites. Court found that while defendant’s terms of service contained an arbitration clause, the display of the link to the terms of service when downloading or using the app was not sufficient to put the plaintiff on notice of an obligation to arbitrate. Court rejected defendant’s argument that modern users assume apps they download come with binding terms and provisions and this should alter the standard for reasonable inquiry notice.
-
LLC Energoalliance v. Republic of Moldova, No. 1:14-CV-01921-CRC (D.D.C. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court granted petitioner’s motion to lift a stay on an action seeking to confirm a foreign arbitration award pursuant to the New York Convention. Petitioner originally sought confirmation in 2014 of an award that was rendered by an ad hoc tribunal in an arbitration arising under the ECT. The court had previously stayed the confirmation proceedings pending review of the award first by the Paris Court of Appeal, which set aside the award because the tribunal lacked jurisdiction under the ECT, and then by the Cour de Cassation which reversed the Paris Court of Appeal and remanded for a new decision. The court stated that while this district had not explicitly adopted the Europcar factors set by Second Circuit precedent, they would still use these factors to determine whether the stay should be lifted. The court determined that the balance of the factors weighed in favor of lifting the stay.
-
Astarita v. Menard, Inc., No. 5:17-CV-06151-RK (W.D. Mo. Nov. 13, 201811/13/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings pursuant to the FAA. Court found plaintiff’s arguments that an arbitration provision was not valid – because it had not signed by the defendant, and because it had irreconcilable differences with a previous agreement – both implicated the validity of the contract itself, and should be delegated to the arbitrator under the AAA rules.
-
Arment v. Dolgencorp, LLC, No. 2:18-CV-00026-CDP (E.D. Mo. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case. Court found that the agreement delegated questions of the validity of the arbitration agreement to the arbitrator, and thus did not consider plaintiffs arguments that the arbitration agreement was invalid under Missouri law.
-
Kincaid v. Ditech Financial LLC, No. 2:18-CV-00085-JPB (N.D.W. Va. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court granted defendants motion to compel arbitration, finding that it need not determine whether this putative class action was a case involving a single claimant case, which required arbitration under the agreement, or a case involving multiple transactions, which did not, because threshold questions of arbitrability had been delegated to the arbitrator under the agreement.
-
Amazon.com, Inc. v. Glenn, No. 2:18-CV-01289-MJP (W.D. Wash. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court confirmed an arbitration award pursuant to the FAA, awarding attorney and arbitration fees. Court held that the petitioner sought relief within one year in the appropriate jurisdiction and served proper notice on the respondent, thus fulfilling the requirements for confirmation under the FAA.
-
Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. Kapil, LLC, No. 8:18-CV-01232-TDC (D. Md. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court entered a default judgment confirming an arbitration award which granted damages for a breach of a franchise agreement. Court found that defendant failed to show any of the limited grounds for vacating the award under the FAA.
-
Helmuth v. ARS National Services, Inc., No. 9:11-CV-81044-KAM (S.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2018)11/13/2018
Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and strike class allegations. Court found that although a valid arbitration agreement existed, and the dispute was within the scope of that agreement, defendant had waived its right to arbitration. Court held that defendant’s actions in filing an answer, engaging in scheduling conferences, conducting discovery and mediation, and filing motions showed intent to litigate and not to arbitrate.
-
Cordoba v. DIRECTV, LLC, 1:15-CV-03755-MHC (N.D. Ga. Nov. 9, 2018)11/09/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, holding that a valid agreement existed between the parties. However, the court determined that the claim at issue was not covered thereby.
-
Roasting Plant of Michigan JV, LLC v. Roasting Plant, Inc., No. 2:18-CV-10295-BAF-RSW (E.D. Mich. Nov. 09, 2018)11/09/2018
Court granted motion to dismiss pursuant to the FAA, holding that if the plaintiffs wished to arbitrate their claims they must do so in New York in accordance with the terms of the arbitration provision. Court found that the FAA preempted the Michigan Franchise Investment Law which prohibited against extra territorial arbitration agreements.
-
DetailXPerts Franchise Systems, LLC, v. TKTM Enterprises, LLC, No. 2:18-CV-11823-VAR-DRG (E.D. Mich. Nov. 9, 2018)11/09/2018
Court granted plaintiff’s motion to dismiss counterclaims that were subject to an arbitration provision in a franchise agreement. Court rejected defendants arguments that the franchise agreement was fraudulently induced, finding that without specific allegations as to fraud in the inducement of the arbitration provision, the court could not decide the validity of the franchise agreement in the first instance.
-
Parks IP Law, LLC v. Wood, No. 18-11178 (11th Cir. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court of appeals reversed district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and remanded. Defendant-appellant had signed a separation agreement and release including an arbitration clause with previous employer plaintiff-appellee. Plaintiff-appellee brought suit on the basis of a promissory note between the parties when defendant-appellant left its employ to start his own firm. District court denied defendant-appellant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the promissory note contained no arbitration clause and no reference to the separation agreement. Court of appeals held that the separation agreement and the promissory note were executed contemporaneously as part of the same transaction and should be construed together.
-
Neal v. Asta Funding, Inc., No. 17-1115 (3d Cir. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of appellee in a dispute over the validity of an arbitration award in favor of appellee. In the arbitration proceedings, appellants argued that the claims against them were not arbitrable because they neither signed the agreement meant to contain the arbitration agreement and because the question of arbitrability must be resolved by a court, not the arbitrator. The arbitrator disagreed, finding that the appellants were subject to the arbitration agreement under a veil-piercing and alter-ego theory. The district court found the claims against appellants were arbitrable and granted summary judgment to appellee. Court of appeals affirmed, rejecting appellants’ arguments that the district court erred by applying federal law instead of state law and that the types of damages awarded against them were not authorized by the underlying agreements.
-
Layman v. City of Peoria, Illinois, No. 1:18-CV-01269-JBM-JEH (C.D. Ill. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court denied plaintiff’s request for declaratory judgment and dismissed case. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument for relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act, as parallel arbitration proceedings were ongoing on the same issues between the same parties.
-
Huntington Hospital v. Huntington Hospital Nurses’ Association, No. 2:18-CV-02628-SJF-ARL (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court granted respondent’s cross-petition to confirm the arbitration award, directing the clerk to enter judgment in the respondent’s favor, and denied the petitioner’s petition to vacate the award. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that the arbitrator exceeded her powers by re-writing the collective bargaining agreement.
-
Cotton Exchange Investment v. Xcel Air Conditioning, No. 2:16-CV-17543-EEF-MBN (E.D. La. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court granted in part and denied in part third-party defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss third-party plaintiff’s complaint, or alternatively to stay the action pending arbitration, staying third-party plaintiff’s claims against third-party defendant pending arbitration, and denying to dismiss.
-
Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. Kustwan, No. 8:18-CV-01231-TDC (D. Md. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court granted plaintiff’s motion for default judgment, confirming the arbitration award.
-
Bofi Federal Bank v. Golub, No. 3:18-CV-00816-LAB-LL (S.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2018)11/08/2018
Court dismissed an action in which petitioner and respondent had filed cross-motions to confirm and vacate an arbitration award. on the basis that the FAA does not independently confer jurisdiction.
-
Wedi Corp. v. Seattle Glass Block Window, Inc., No. 2:18-CV-00636-TSZ (W.D. Wash. Nov. 7, 2018)11/07/2018
Court granted in part and deferred in part defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Court found that regarding plaintiff’s claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets, plaintiff was barred on res judicata or collateral estoppel grounds from re-litigating these claims against defendant as plaintiff had pursued the same claims against the defendant’s owner in arbitration proceedings. Court deferred plaintiff’s fraud claim against the defendant pending further briefing.
-
State Automobile Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rod & Reel, Inc., No. 8:18-CV-00340-PWG (D. Md. Nov. 7, 2018)11/07/2018
Court granted plaintiff’s petition to modify an arbitration award and denied plaintiff’s petition to vacate the arbitral award. Court held that the award provided for plaintiff insurer to pay compensation to defendant insured outside of the scope of coverage. Court modified the arbitral award to cover only the covered month-to-month calculations.
-
Greene v. Onemain Financial Group, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-00848-LCB-LPA (M.D.N.C. Nov. 7, 2018)11/07/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a wrongful termination case, finding that plaintiff electronically signed a certificate agreement to submit covered disputes to binding arbitration. Court rejected plaintiff’s arguments that there was no assent, no mutuality of agreement, and no meeting of the minds and that, in any case, the arbitration agreement is not enforceable due to lack of consideration.
-
Crafty Productions, Inc. v. Fuqing Sanxing Crafts Co. Ltd., No. 3:15-CV-00719-BAS-JLB (S.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2018)11/07/2018
Court denied plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of court’s previous dismissal of copyright infringement claims, rejecting the plaintiff’s contention that the arbitrator’s findings in a parallel proceeding were evidence of error by the court.
-
HTC Corporation v. Telefonaktiebolaget Ericsson, No. 6:18-CV-00243-JRG (E.D. Tex. Nov. 7, 2018)11/07/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to sever, stay, and compel arbitration plaintiff’s “past refund” claims under prior licensing agreements and motion to compel arbitration plaintiff’s antitrust claims. Court found valid arbitration agreements within each of the prior license agreements at issue between the parties and found the plaintiff’s claims were arbitrable. Court rejected plaintiff’s arguments for denial of defendant’s motion on the bases that the defendant waived its right to arbitration by substantially invoking the judicial process.
-
Gidding v. Fitz, No. 18-1106 (10th Cir. Nov. 6, 2018)11/06/2018
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of petitioner-appellant’s motion to vacate an arbitration award and grant of respondent-appellee’s motion to confirm the award. Petitioner-appellant limited his participation in the arbitration proceedings underlying the arbitral award and the arbitrator issued an award in the respondent-appellee’s favor. On appeal, the petitioner-appellant argued the arbitration proceeding was fundamentally unfair as the arbitrator was appointed before petitioner-appellant joined the arbitration. Court of appeals rejected this argument and affirmed.
-
In re: Servotronics, Inc., No. 2:18-MC-00364-DCN (D.S.C. Nov. 6, 2018)11/06/2018
Court denied an ex parte application pursuant to 28 USC § 1782 to take discovery for use in a foreign arbitration, where the incident giving rise to the arbitration occurred in a U.S. state but the parties agreed to private arbitration in England. Court held a private arbitration body does not fall within the § 1782 definition of “tribunal” and, thus, found that it did not have jurisdiction to grant the application.
-
Hodgson Williams v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., No. 1:18-CV-22774-KMW (S.D. Fla. Nov. 6, 2018)11/06/2018
Magistrate judge recommended plaintiff’s motion to vacate an arbitral award be denied, and defendant’s cross-motion to confirm be granted and the final award be affirmed. Magistrate judge found that plaintiff did not provide sufficient basis for vacatur, because plaintiff’s challenges were based on disagreements with legal and evidentiary determinations made by the arbitrator, not on one of the seven defenses to enforcement enumerated in the New York Convention.
-
Bayonne Energy Center, LLC v. Power Engineers, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-02726-SDW-LDW (D.N.J. Nov. 6, 2018)11/06/2018
Court denied third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss the third-party complaint or, alternatively, to stay proceeding pending arbitration on the basis of an arbitration agreement between plaintiff and third-party defendant. Court rejected third-party defendant’s only argument that plaintiff filed the action to circumvent the arbitration agreement, holding that the court would not speculate as to why plaintiff did not pursue claims in arbitration or otherwise.
-
Feldman v. Norman, No. 1:18-CV-04662 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 6, 2018)11/06/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to stay litigation pending arbitration of plaintiffs’ claims against a related party, the law firm owned by defendants. Court rejected plaintiffs’ argument that because defendants are not signatories to the employment agreement between the plaintiffs and the law firm, which contained an arbitration provision, defendants are not entitled to a stay. Court found that plaintiffs’ claims in the present case arise from the same set of facts as the claims against the law firm at arbitration.
-
Smiley v. Forcepoint Federal, LLC, No. 3:18-CV-00026-JAG (E.D. Va. Nov. 5, 2018)11/05/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration on the basis of an arbitration agreement within plaintiff’s employment contract. Court rejected plaintiff’s arguments that the prohibitive costs of arbitration render the arbitration clause unconscionable and that defendant defaulted on its right to compel arbitration by failing to mention arbitration in its answer and for waiting seven months to invoke the arbitration agreement.
-
Marchant v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., No 2:18-CV-02757-RMG (D.S.C. Nov. 5, 2018)11/05/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding a valid arbitration agreement existed between plaintiff employee and defendant former employer. Court rejected plaintiff’s arguments that she did not enter the arbitration agreement knowingly and that the contract containing the arbitration agreement was unconscionable as a contract of adhesion.
-
Zitan Technologies, LLC v. Yu, No. 3:18-CV-00395-RCJ-WGC (D. Nev. Nov. 5, 2018)11/05/2018
Court ordered discovery in this action to be stayed pending resolution of the parties’ dispute in the arbitration forum. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that discovery in the federal action is relevant to plaintiff’s sought-after injunctive relief in the arbitration forum and accepted defendant’s argument that discovery should proceed solely in the arbitration forum.
-
Hunt v. Potter County, No. 4:16-CV-01729-MWB (M.D. Pa. Nov. 5, 2018)11/05/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment. In its discussion, court rejected defendant’s argument that plaintiff’s claims were preempted by plaintiff’s failure to exhaust the administrative remedies available to him by not entering binding arbitration. Court found that exhaustion of remedies is not a prerequisite to action, but granted summary judgment on other grounds.