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.
-
Newmont Mining Corp. v. Anglogold Ashanti Limited, No. 1:17-CV-08065-RA (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2018)09/30/2018
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court found that the parties’ agreement expressly required them to submit any disputes with respect to the correctness of defendant's calculations to an accounting firm “for resolution.”
-
Moyer v. Wells Fargo, No. 3:17-CV-02088-RDM (M.D. Pa. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration on the basis of an arbitration agreement within the brokerage agreement. Court rejected plaintiff’s arguments of fraud, duress, and unconscionability, as well as fraudulent inducement, differentiating that while plaintiff may have been fraudulently induced to enter the revised brokerage agreement, he was not fraudulently induced to arbitrate.
-
Penneco Pipeline Corporation v. K. Petroleum, Inc., No. 2:17-cv-01364-DSC (W.D. Penn. Sept. 27, 2018)
09/27/2018Court denied motion to vacate arbitral award, finding that the arbitrator’s decision drew its essence from the parties’ agreement.
-
Sharbat v. Muskat, No. 1:17-CV-04776-KAM-CLP (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2018)
09/27/2018Court granted motion to dismiss petition to confirm arbitral award, finding that the interim arbitral award anticipating further proceedings following discovery was non-final.
-
Spikener v. Noble Food Group Inc., No. 3:18-CV-02855-LB (N.D. Cal. Sept. 27, 2018)
09/27/2018Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings, finding that arbitration agreement was not procedurally unconscionable since it had an opt out provision and that it was not substantively unconscionable since employer had offered to pay cost and fees of arbitration.
-
Richardson v. Coverall North America, Inc., No. 3:18-CV-00532-MAS-TJB (D.N.J. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court partially granted and partially denied motion to compel arbitration. As to one plaintiff, Court found that reference to AAA rules in agreement with unsophisticated party was not an agreement to arbitrate arbitrability and that party had not adequately been put on notice that it was waiving statutory rights. As to other plaintiff, Court found that arbitration agreement clearly required arbitration of arbitrability.
-
Gulledge v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, No. 2:18-CV-06657-JCZ-KWR (E.D. La. Sept. 27, 2018)
09/27/2018Court denied motion to remand, finding that dispute fell within the scope of the New York Convention and that state law barring mandatory arbitration of insurance disputes was preempted by New York Convention.
-
Iraq Middle Market Development Foundation v. Harmoosh, No. 1:15-CV-01124-GLR (D. Md. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court granted motion for summary judgment and to compel arbitration, finding that party did not waive right to enforce arbitration clause by failing to assert it in summary Iraq proceeding.
-
Unión Insular de Trabajadores Industriales y Construcciones Eléctricas, Inc. v. Onelink Communications, No. 3:15-CV-02074-ADC (D.P.R. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court denied motion for vacatur of arbitral award, finding that the arbitrator reasonably construed the operative agreement, did not exceed her authority, and did not fail to resolve the dispute submitted to her.
-
Turner v. Efinancial, LLC, No. 1:18-CV-00292-CMA-GPG (D. Col. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court stayed proceedings pending outcome of parallel arbitration and denied motion to stay arbitration, finding that plaintiff’s assertions that she had not visited website or submitted webform agreeing to arbitration were not credible.
-
HRB Professional Resources LLC v. Bello, No. 7:17-CV-07443-KMK (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court granted motion to confirm arbitral award, finding that respondent’s failure to object to the motion within ninety precluded him from raising objections and that his proposed objections were in any event not meritorious.
-
Bestway (USA), Inc., No. 4:17-CV-00205-HSG (N.D. Cal. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court granted motion for preliminary injunction enjoining an ongoing arbitration pursued in violation of prior grant of temporary restraining order.
-
Griggs v. S.G.E. Management, L.L.C., No. 17-50655 (4th Cir. Sept. 27, 2018)09/27/2018
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s dismissal without prejudice of case for failure to prosecute where motion to compel arbitration had been granted and plaintiff failed to arbitrate, finding that dismissal was within the district court’s discretion. Circuit court did not review district court’s holdings as to the applicability of the arbitration clause, noting that the FAA forecloses interlocutory reviews of orders compelling arbitration.
-
Hebei Hengbo New Materials Technology Co., Ltd. v. Apple, Inc., No. 5:18-CV-00468-LHK (N.D. Cal. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that party had waived right to rely on arbitration clause by arguing that contract had been rescinded.
-
Grigsby v. Income Property USA, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-01110-RJS-PMW (D. Utah Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that reference to arbitration before the American Arbitration Association was insufficient to establish intent that the parties intended to delegate question of arbitrability to arbitrators pursuant to the American Arbitration Association rules, and that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable.
-
Ukshini v. Comity Realty Corporation, No. 1:15-CV-06214-PKC-KNF (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court denied motion to vacate arbitral award, finding that there was no basis to vacate the award under the Federal Arbitration Act.
-
Andersen v. Equity Trust Company, No. 0:18-CV-00471-DWF-LIB (D. Minn. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings, rejecting argument that arbitration agreement had been superseded by other agreements that plaintiff did not sign and that plaintiff’s initiation of suit did not waive right to enforce arbitration agreement since motion to compel arbitration was brought promptly upon suit being removed to federal court.
-
Skin Consultants, LLC v. Textron Aviation, Inc., No. 4:17-CV-00166-SA-RP (N.D. Miss. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings, finding that it had personal jurisdiction over the defendant under Mississippi’s long-arm statute and that the claims fell within the scope of the arbitration agreements.
-
DIAS Analytic Corporation v. Soex (Hong Kong) Industry & Investment Co. Ltd., No. 8:18-CV-01458-WFJ-TGW (M.D. Fla. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings pursuant to the terms of the applicable contract, finding that the dispute resolution provisions of an employment agreement were irrelevant given that the employee was not a party to the dispute.
-
GGNSC Louisville Hillcreek, LLC v. Estate of Bramer, No. 3:17-CV-00439-DJH (W.D. Ky. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court denied petition to compel arbitration, finding that presentation of a new arbitration agreement, which plaintiff did not sign, extinguished prior arbitration agreement as to new claims.
-
Dickey v. National Football League, No. 1:17-CV-12295-IT (D. Mass. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that claims did not come within the scope of the arbitration clause.
-
Khath v. Midland Funding, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-10727-MLW (D. Mass. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court partially modified magistrate judge’s order compelling arbitration in respect of one plaintiff, finding that (i) question of whether arbitration agreements existed was to be decided by the court; (ii) as to one plaintiff there was no triable issue of fact as to whether an arbitration agreement existed but the validity of the class action waiver should be determined before arbitration agreement is enforced; and (iii) as to another plaintiff there was a triable issue of fact as to whether an arbitration agreement existed.
-
American Airlines, Inc. v. Mawhinney, No. 16-36638 (9th Cir. Sept. 26, 2018)09/26/2018
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s order compelling arbitration of the plaintiff’s claim against his employer, and reversed its order compelling arbitration of the plaintiff’s claim against his union. Circuit court found that (i) employer did not waive right to arbitrate by waiting to move to compel until after an agency investigation was complete; and (ii) union was not a party to the arbitration agreement and could not it under agency law.
-
O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 14-16078 (9th Cir. Sept. 25, 2018)09/25/2018
Court of appeals reversed district court denial of motion to compel arbitration, finding that lead plaintiff could not constructively opt out of arbitration on behalf of entire class and that the Supreme Court’s decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S.Ct. 1612 (2018) foreclosed argument that arbitration agreements were unenforceable because they violation the National Labor Relations Act.
-
Ranson v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., No. 1:18-CV-00105-SNLJ (E.D. Mo. Sept. 25, 2018)09/25/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that there was no genuine issue of fact as to the making of the arbitration agreement (which was signed by the plaintiff) and that parties’ reciprocal agreements to arbitrate constituted sufficient mutual consideration.
-
Lanza v. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), No. 1:18-CV-10859-PBS (D. Mass. Sept. 25, 2018)09/25/2018
Court granted motion to dismiss action against FINRA alleging breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing due to arbitrators’ dismissal of claim in unreasoned, two-sentence decision. Court found that an alleged failure to provide sufficient reasons for an arbitral award (as opposed to a failure to issue any award at all) fell within the scope of arbitral immunity, and that arbitrators’ failure to provide a reasoned decision was not a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing since FINRA rules require reasoned decisions only when jointly requested by the parties.
-
Prasad v. Pinnacle Property Management Services, LLC, No. 5:17-CV-02794-VKD (N.D. Cal. Sept. 25, 2018)09/25/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings, finding that, although there was “some procedural unconscionability” in how the arbitration agreement was presented, and certain provisions were substantively unconscionable, those provisions were severable and the arbitration agreement could be enforced without them.
-
Doerman v. Meijer, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00571-MRB (S.D. Oh. Sept. 25, 2018)09/25/2018
Court denied motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that arbitration agreement was unenforceable because it permitted an employer to make unilateral changes without providing advance notice to employees, and there was no evidence that plaintiff agreed to subsequent arbitration agreement requiring advance notice.
-
Landry v. Thomson Reuters Corporation, No. 1:16-CV-00507-SM (D.N.H. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court granted motion to stay proceedings pending conclusion of parallel arbitration. Court found that plaintiff had standing to bring statutory claims against background reporting company for breach of Fair Credit Reporting Act with respect to an incorrect background report, but that the plaintiff’s request for money damages resulting from his dismissal from employment allegedly as a result of the report overlapped with factual issues being addressed in a separate arbitration against the plaintiff’s former employer arising from the dismissal.
-
Harris v. TD Ameritrade Inc., No. 1:17-CV-06033-LTS-BCM (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that nothing in the arbitration agreement precluded arbitration of constitutional due process claim, and the claim was improper in any event.
-
Diversant, LLC v. Carino, No. 3:18-CV-03155-AET-DEA (D.N.J. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court dismissed motion to dismiss in favor of arbitration, finding that party’s pursuant of parallel arbitral proceedings for compensatory damages did not preclude it from also pursuing a court action for injunctive relief, as such an action was permitted by the arbitration agreement.
-
Thompson v. AT&T Services, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-03607 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court denied motion to compel arbitration without prejudice, finding that defendant had failed to establish that plaintiff was an agent of a party to the arbitration agreement, and permitted further discovery on the question.
-
Freeman v. Rochester Psychiatric Center, No. 6:16-CV-06668-MAT-MWP (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court denied motion to vacate arbitral award, finding that the Plaintiff’s attacks on the award amounted to disagreements with the arbitrator’s weighing of evidence and did not establish manifest disregard of the law.
-
De Angelis v. Nolan Enterprises, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00926-ALM-EPD (S.D. Oh. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court denied motion to stay or dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that agreement to delegate questions of arbitrability to arbitrator was illusory since one party retained the ability to modify contract without notice.
-
Pictet Overseas Inc. v. Helvetia Trust, No. 17-12279 (11th Cir. Sept. 24, 2018)09/24/2018
Court of appeals confirmed district court ruling that claims were not subject to mandatory FINRA arbitration under FINRA Rule 12200, finding that Rule 12200 was intended to bind a FINRA member’s associated persons to arbitrate disputes only when the dispute arises in connection with the business activities of the associated person undertaken in his or her capacity as an associated person of the FINRA member.
-
Brown v. Firstsource Advantage, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-05760-GJP (E.D. Penn. Sept. 21, 2018)09/21/2018
Court granted motion to intervene as defendant in action again debt collector, finding inter alia that credit card company had an interest in seeking to enforce arbitration provision in debt agreement.
-
Johnson v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 1:16-CV-05468 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 20, 201809/20/2018
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, dismissing class claims and staying the case. Court found that plaintiff had agreed to the arbitration clause in the terms of service when he created an Uber account, regardless of whether he followed the link to read the terms of service. Court also rejected plaintiff’s argument that certain claims were outside the scope of the arbitration clause, holding that once it is clear that the parties have agreed to arbitrate, any doubt concerning the scope of arbitration is resolved in favor of arbitration.
-
JPay, Inc. v. Kobel, No. 17-13611 (11th Cir. Sept. 19, 2018)09/19/2018
Court of appeals reversed and remanded district court decision denying a motion to compel arbitration. Court held that the availability of class arbitration is a question of arbitrability that is for the court to decide absent express language in the agreement that evidenced a clear and unmistakable intent to arbitrate the issue, and found that here the language used by the parties expressed a clear intent to arbitrate gateway questions of arbitrability.
-
De Rendon v. Ventura, No. 1:17-CV-24380-FAM (S.D. Fla. Sept. 19 2018)09/19/2018
Court adopted report and recommendation of magistrate judge confirming a foreign arbitration award pursuant to the New York Convention. Court rejected respondent’s argument that the award was invalid under Articles V(1)(a) and V(1)(d) of the Convention because the appointed arbitrators were not Columbian nationals, finding that respondent’s had agreed to arbitration under the rules of the ICC which provides for ICC appointment of arbitrators.
-
Beres v. Wilbanks Securities, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-01024-KLM (D. Colo. Sept. 19, 2018)09/19/2018
Court granted petition to confirm an arbitration award, finding that the arbitration panel was justified in refusing to postpone an evidentiary hearing after having postponed it on two prior occasions. Court further found that an incorrect application of a state’s statute of limitations did not rise to the level of manifest disregard of the law.
-
Davis v. Macy's Retail Holdings, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-01807-JBA (D. Conn. Sept. 19, 2018)
09/19/2018Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that the agreement was invalid because it was induced by fraudulent misrepresentations, finding that plaintiff failed to establish that defendant knew certain representations to be false.
-
Akinlemibola v. Dohardmoney.com, No. 1:17-CV-03998-TWP-DML (S.D. Ind. Sept. 19, 2018)
09/19/2018Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss for improper venue, finding that an arbitration clause in the contract required the claims be arbitrated. Court rejected plaintiffs argument that defendant had waived its right to object to venue based on making two motions to extend time.
-
Youll v. Estherville IA Assisted Living Facility, LLC, No. 3:18-CV-03051-CJW (N.D. Iowa Sept. 18, 2018)09/18/2018
Court granted defendant’s unresisted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings. Court found that the arbitration clause at issue was part of a valid contract and that the present dispute was within the scope of the arbitration, and thus compelled arbitration pursuant to the FAA.
-
Munger v. Cascade Steel Rolling Mills Inc., No. 3:18-CV-00970-SI (D. Or. Sept. 18, 2018)
09/18/2018Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss certain claims that had previously been arbitrated for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Court rejected defendant’s argument that a valid agreement to arbitrate divests the court of jurisdiction to hear claims subject to the agreement. Although defendant’s did not make a motion to compel arbitration, court further found that a motion to compel arbitration could not have been brought under FRCP 12(b)(1).
-
Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone International Trade Service Co. Ltd. v. Tiancheng International Inc. USA, No. 5:17-CV-021127-PA-SHK (C.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2018)09/18/2018
Court granted petitioner’s motion to confirm a CIETAC arbitration award issued in a contract dispute, finding that respondent failed to satisfy its burden to establish a defense under the New York Convention. Court stated that the review of foreign awards is limited and enforcement could only be refused if the court found one of the seven grounds set out in Article V of the New York Convention. Court found that allegations of forgery of the underlying contract were matters to be exclusively determined by the arbitrator, and even if accepted as true, fall short of establishing a defense under the New York Convention.
-
Cook v. General Nutrition Corp., No. 17-3216 (3d Cir. Sept. 17, 2018)09/17/2018
Court of appeals affirmed the district court’s order granting the motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. Amongst other things, appellant argued that the district court erred by granting the motion to compel arbitration. Court of appeals concluded that it was unable to consider this argument as the FAA limits appellate review to final orders.
-
Color Events, BV v. Multi-Talent Agency, Inc., No. 6:18-CV-00648-RBD-DCI (M.D. Fla. Sept. 17, 2018)09/17/2018
Court adopted and confirmed the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to grant petitioner’s motion for final default judgment to confirm an ICDR award. Magistrate judge found that (i) the well-pled allegations of the petition, the attached documents, and the affidavit in support of the motion adequately establish the basis for a default judgment; (ii) the court had jurisdiction under the FAA; and (iii) venue was properly served.
-
Unison Co., Ltd., v. Juhl Energy Development, Inc., No. 0:13-CV-03342-BRT (D. Minn. Sept. 17, 2018)09/17/2018
Court granted defendants motion to confirm an arbitration award. Court denied plaintiff’s motions, both to modify the award under section 11 of the FAA, and to vacate the award under § 10 of the FAA. Court held that the arbitration panel did not exceed its authority, and that the prescribed method elected for granting relief was to be treated with great deference.
-
Zambrano v. Strategy Delivery Solutions, LLC, No. 1:15-CV-08410-ER (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 17, 2018)09/17/2018
Court denied defendants’ motion to confirm an arbitration award. Court found that the parties had not agreed to proceed to arbitration because the plaintiff had stipulated to all the defendant’s assertions, leaving no real question or dispute for the arbitrator to resolve. Court stated that the declaratory relief defendant sought after plaintiff’s concession amounted to an advisory opinion that plaintiff had neither agreed to arbitrate nor to pay for.