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
Shenzhen Yunzhongge Technology Co. Ltd., v. Amazon.com Services LLC, No. 2:23-CV-01693-TL (W.D. Wash. Apr. 17, 2024)
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate an arbitration award under the FAA for liquidated damages in connection with plaintiff’s alleged violation of defendant’s online sales policies. Court held that the arbitrator did not manifestly disregard the law, the award did not violate public policy, and the award was not a completely irrational interpretation of the underlying contract. Court granted defendant’s cross-motion to confirm the award.
Nemo Digital Holdings Corp. v. XYZ Financial Markets LLC, No. 2:24-CV-00737-EP-JSA (D.N.J. Apr. 11, 2024)
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration on the grounds that plaintiff alleged the entire agreement between the parties was procured by fraud but did not specifically argue that the arbitration agreement was procured by fraud. Court denied defendants’ motion for attorneys’ fees, reasoning that it could not determine who was considered a prevailing party at that stage, considering the opinion was a preliminary procedural order.
Foundation Church Inc. v. Independent Specialty Insurance Company, No. 23-CV-02847-CEH-J_S (M.D. Fla. Apr. 11, 2024)
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay the case pending arbitration where the parties’ insurance contract contained an arbitration clause, and the four jurisdictional factors were satisfied under the New York Convention.
Fli-Lo Falcon LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 22-35818 (9th Cir. Apr. 10, 2024)
Court of appeals affirmed the district court’s opinion granting motion to compel arbitration, reasoning that the transportation worker exemption under Section I of the FAA does not extend to business entities or commercial contracts. Court of appeals found the delegation provision in the arbitration clause was not unconscionable, as it was between sophisticated parties, so plaintiffs’ unconscionability arguments directed at the arbitration agreement as a whole must be decided by the arbitrator.
Huzhou Chuangtai Rongyuan Investment Management Partnership, v. Qin, No. 23-0747 (2d Cir. Apr. 10, 2024)
Court of appeals affirmed district court judgment granting motion for summary judgment to confirm a CIETAC arbitration award under the New York Convention and denying a motion for reconsideration where petitioner was provided adequate notice of arbitration.
Anhui Light Industries International Co., Ltd. v. Dream Express Inc., 23-CV-05942-RGK-PD (C.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2024)
Court denied petition to confirm a CIETAC arbitration award under the New York Convention, finding respondent was not a party to the contracts, which were entered into fraudulently in respondent’s name, and therefore, did not consent to arbitration.