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.
Court overruled defendants’ objections to magistrate judge’s order denying defendants’ motion to compel discovery of documents to support defendants’ anticipated defense against plaintiff’s attempt to enforce arbitration award, finding that discovery should be limited to avoid undermining the twin goals of arbitration: settling disputes efficiently and avoiding long and expensive litigation.
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s order compelling arbitration under the New York Convention. Court of appeals found written agreements existed between the parties, as the conditions precedent to contract formation were substantially complied with and a copy of the executed agreements was supplied to defendants.
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s decision to confirm an Indian arbitration award under the New York Convention. Court of appeals held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to confirm the arbitral award, finding that an earlier remand to state court did not preclude the district court from hearing a separate action premised on new factual developments. Court of appeals also found that the arbitration clause was enforceable and accepted state court’s judgment barring appellant from litigating against other parties.
Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and granted motion to dismiss with leave to amend in a case involving pro se plaintiffs. Court found that it could not determine whether the disputes were covered by an arbitration agreement until the plaintiffs had filed a complaint with sufficient factual allegations to determine whether arbitration was necessary.
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a product liability suit. Court found that there was a valid and enforceable arbitration clause in the user agreement consented to by the plaintiff and that the claim fell within its scope.