A collection of the most recent US international arbitration decisions is available here. Decisions can be quickly retrieved by using the filter tools below.

• Veolia Water Solutions & Technologies Support v. Westech Engineering, Inc., No. 5:19-CV-00344-FL (E.D.N.C. Jan. 22, 2020)

  01/22/2020

  Court denied respondents’ petition to compel arbitration, finding that it lacked the power to compel arbitration or enjoin litigation when a parallel action—determining the same issues between the same parties—was filed in a Utah district court before the North Carolina action.  Court found that only the district where the litigation commenced has the authority to compel arbitration and enjoin litigation.

• Connell v. Apex Systems, LLC, No. 3:19-CV-00299-JAG (E.D. Va. Jan. 21, 2020)

  01/21/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that defendant did not waive its right to arbitrate when it filed a motion to compel arbitration one month after plaintiffs filed their complaint.  Court further found that defendant’s use of the discovery process did not result in a waiver of its right to arbitrate, as defendant did not file any dispositive motions or otherwise attempt to litigate the matter on the merits.

• Givens-Keefer v. American Express Company, No. 1:18-CV-04164-JPO (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2020)

  01/21/2020

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration finding that plaintiff agreed to arbitrate all disputes with her employer when she received an offer letter containing an arbitration provision and she continued working at defendants’ company.

• National Partitions, Inc. v. LJH Commercial Contracting, LLC, No. 3:18-CV-00470-HBG (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 17, 2020)

  01/17/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that defendant did not waive its right to compel arbitration when it waited 11 months to file its motion.  Court found that defendant provided plaintiff sufficient notice of defendant’s intent to arbitrate, including raising arbitration as an affirmative defense in its answer.     

• Hunter v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., No. 3:19-CV-01053-WHO (N.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 2020)

  01/17/2020

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration finding that an arbitration clause resulting from a contract of adhesion was not sufficiently procedurally unconscionable to deny enforcement of the arbitration clause.  Court found that fee-shifting provisions precluding plaintiff from seeking attorneys’ fees or arbitration costs were substantively unconscionable and severed such provisions as unenforceable.  Court further found that plaintiff’s claims could not be arbitrated on a class-wide basis without an explicit statement to that effect in the arbitration agreement.

• Harrison v. Macy, Inc., No. 18-11424 (11th Cir. Jan. 9, 2020)

  01/09/2020

  Court of appeals vacated district court order compelling arbitration and remanded for litigation on the merits where party seeking to force arbitration voluntarily waived right to arbitrate plaintiff’s claims while appeal was pending.

• Coleman v. Alaska USA Federal Credit Union, No. 3:19-CV-00229-HRH (D. Alaska Jan. 9, 2020)

  01/09/2020

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, holding that the arbitration agreement added by defendant by addendum to the contract was ineffective. Court found that the Account Agreement between the parties required defendant to provide notice to plaintiff before making “adverse changes” to the agreement by addenda, and that the addition of a mandatory arbitration provision was such an “adverse” change. Court held that because defendant failed to provide proper notice of this change, the arbitration provision was ineffective pursuant to general contract principles. 

• Psara Energy, Ltd. v. Advantage Arrow Shipping, LLC, No. 19-40071 (5th Cir. Jan. 9, 2020)

  01/09/2020

  Court of appeals dismissed appeal of a district court Order granting a motion to compel arbitration, finding that the order, which administratively closed the case, was not a final, appealable order under the FAA.   

• SFM LLC v. Best Roast Coffee LLC, No. 2:19-CV-04820-JAT (D. Ariz. Jan. 7, 2020) 

  01/07/2020

  Court granted in part defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding that mandatory arbitration agreement between the parties governed a portion of plaintiff’s claims. Court held that it had jurisdiction over plaintiff’s requests for injunctive relief, but that damages claims were controlled by mandatory arbitration provision in agreement. 

• Gonzales v. Sitel Operating Corporation, No. 2:19-CV-00876-GMN-VCF (D. Nev. Jan. 7, 2020)

  01/07/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration but denied motion to stay case, electing instead to dismiss the case without prejudice. Court found there were no remaining issues that would require the court’s attention after compelling arbitration.

• Weiss v. American Express National bank, No. 1:19-CV-04720-JPO (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 7, 2020) 

  01/07/2020

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration where arbitration clause was permissive rather than mandatory, and defendant had failed to comply with the notice procedures in the agreement for initiating an arbitration prior to litigation. 

• Border Area Mental Health, Inc. v. United Behavioral Health, Inc., No. 1:16-CV-01213-MV-SCY (D.N.M. Jan. 7, 2020) 

  01/07/2020

  Court denied motion for reconsideration of an order dismissing plaintiff’s claims where an arbitrator had found those claims were subject to mandatory arbitration. Court found that dismissal of claims would not preclude plaintiffs from pursuing those claims through arbitration, so there was no manifest injustice that could warrant reconsideration under FRCP Rule 59 (e).  

• Davis v. White, No. 19-11760 (11th Cir. Jan. 7, 2020)

  01/07/2020

  Eleventh Circuit affirmed denial of motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant had waived their right to arbitrate where it had waited 18 months from the filing of complaints to file its motion to compel arbitration. Court found that defendant had acted inconsistently with its right to arbitrate by filing motions to dismiss which sought to resolve the parties’ dispute on the merits. Court also found defendant had prejudiced plaintiffs in this delay, by forcing them to spend resources contesting the motion to dismiss, and by waiting to raise arbitration until litigation in federal court proved unfavorable. 

• Kamineni v. Tesla, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-14288-RBK-KMW (D.N.J. Jan. 6, 2020)

  01/06/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court found that although New Jersey’s Lemon Law referenced the possibility of bringing a claim in a judicial forum, such references are insufficient to establish a legal intent to preclude arbitration. 

• Law Offices of Joseph L. Manson III v. Aoki., No. 1:19-CV-04392-LTS-GWG (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2020) 

  01/03/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings pending outcome of arbitration, but denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration where seat of arbitration mandated by arbitration agreement was Washington, D.C. Court found that a valid agreement to arbitrate did exist, but that it did not have power under the FAA § 4 to compel arbitration proceedings which occur outside of the Southern District of New York. 

• Ostrolenk Faber LLP v. Lagassey, No. 1:18-CV-01533-RA (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 2020)

  01/02/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that there was a valid obligation to arbitrate, and that the pro se defendant did not, by his delay, waive his right to compel arbitration.

• Wayland Kathan v. Autovest, LLC, No. 2:19-CV-00486-TC-CMR (D. Utah Dec. 30, 2019)

  12/30/2019

  Court denied plaintiff’s motion to lift stay of court action pending arbitration. Court found that AAA’s initial (erroneous) refusal to administer the arbitration was not a proper reason to lift the stay, since AAA eventually agreed to administer the arbitration. Court also found that defendant had made clear throughout the process that it was willing and able to resolve any issues identified by AAA and to arbitrate the case.

• Doctor’s Associates, LLC v. Tripathi, No. 16-4329-CV (2d Cir. Dec. 23, 2019)

  12/23/2019

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s decision granting injunction to enjoin California state-court action commenced by defendants in breach of arbitration clause, finding that arbitration clause had clearly delegated gateway issues for the arbitrator’s determination in the first instance.

• Wilson v. Huuuge, Inc., No. 18-36017 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2019) 

  12/20/2019

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of motion to compel arbitration against a smartphone app user, finding that defendant did not provide reasonable notice of the arbitration agreement.  Since plaintiff had neither actual nor constructive notice of the agreement he was not bound by the arbitration clause. 

• Jamieson v. Securities America, Inc., No. 7:19-CV-01817-VB (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2019) 

  12/20/2019

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA, finding the plaintiffs’ agreed to arbitrate and the arbitral agreements applied to the new accounts at issue by incorporation.  Court determined that all plaintiffs did not have to agree to the same terms of arbitration for all of their accounts and that the plaintiffs’ claims fell within the scope of the arbitral agreements.  Court stayed proceedings pending arbitration.

• National Union Fire Insurance v. BMC Stock Holdings, Inc., No. 18-3851-CV (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2019)

  12/20/2019

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s decision granting motion to compel arbitration, finding that agreement between parties had incorporated by reference arbitration clause in respondent’s general liability insurance policies

• JR. Food Stores, Inc. v. Hartland Construction Group, LLC and Peoples Bank, No. 1:19-CV-00076-GNS-RSE (W.D. Ky. Dec. 19, 2019) 

  12/19/2019

  Court granted motion to compel mediation and arbitration and to stay proceedings pursuant to the FAA.  Court found it was undisputed that the plaintiff and one of the defendants entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate.  Court concluded that the other defendant, a non-signatory issuer of a performance bond for a construction contract, was compelled to arbitrate, where the performance bond made reference to the contract and the disputes between the parties were intertwined with the underlying contract.

• Citadel Servicing Corporation v. Castle Placement, LLC, No. 1:19-CV-03212-KPF (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 19, 2019) 

  12/19/2019

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA and denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin defendants from enforcing the arbitration clause.  Court found that it was for the arbitrator to determine whether non-signatory defendants were agents of the signatory and therefore, could enforce the arbitral agreement.  Court considered that the incorporation of the FINRA Rules, which empower the arbitrator to decide issues of arbitrability, provided further support for the parties’ intent to delegate issues of arbitrability to the arbitrator.

• Bestway (USA), Inc., v. Scott, No. 18-16228 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2019) 

  12/18/2019

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that he had waived his right to arbitrate. 

• Banks v. Waitr Holdings, Inc., No. 2:19-CV-00898-TAD-KK (W.D. La. Dec. 17, 2019) 

  12/17/2019

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding there was a valid agreement to arbitrate and that the statutory claims fell within the scope of the agreement.  Court denied motion to dismiss the claims with prejudice and instead, administratively closed the case.

• Flores v. Adir International, LLC, No. 18-55959 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2019) 

  12/17/2019

  Court affirmed district court’s denial of motion to compel arbitration, finding plaintiff had waived the right to arbitrate.

• Hobbs v. Apollo Interactive, Inc., No. 4:19-CV-00057-CDL (M.D. Ga. Dec. 17, 2019) 

  12/17/2019

  Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the action in favor of arbitration.  Court found that there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether the parties had entered into an agreement to arbitrate and at the early stage in the proceedings, the court could not conclude as a matter of law that the parties had a valid agreement to arbitrate.  

• Henry v. Educational Financial Service, No. 18-20809 (5th. Cir. Dec. 16, 2019)

  12/16/2019

  Court of appeals affirmed bankruptcy court’s decision denying motion to compel arbitration, finding that bankruptcy courts have discretion to refuse to compel arbitration in proceedings seeking enforcement of a discharge injunction between debtor and creditor.

• Story v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated and Bank of America Corporation, No. 2:19-CV-02301-SSV-JVM (E.D. La. Dec. 13, 2019)

  12/13/2019

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court found the arbitral agreement was valid with regard to a non-signatory parent company where its subsidiary was a signatory to the arbitral agreement. Court also found the dispute fell within the scope of the agreement and concluded that the question of whether a settlement in a related suit mooted the present dispute was an issue for the arbitrator.

• Bowman v. Phoenix Trinity Manufacturing, Inc., No. 3:18-CV-00332-TMR-MJN (S.D. Ohio Dec. 13, 2019)

  12/13/2019

  Magistrate judge recommended that court grant motion to compel arbitration where plaintiffs asserted that defendant had waived right to arbitrate by filing an answer to plaintiffs’ complaint with no mention of an arbitration agreement, and by further engaging in litigation for over one year. Court found that plaintiff had failed to cite to precedent or to demonstrate that it was prejudiced by defendant’s delay in filing motion to compel arbitration.

• Raeis Constructors, LLC v. Circle K Stores, Inc., No. 5:18-CV-240-FL (E.D. N.C. Dec. 13, 2019)

  12/13/2019

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration between defendant and third-party defendant, and denied plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration with third-party defendant finding that plaintiff had waived its right to arbitrate by substantially utilizing the litigation process.

• Golomb Mercantile Company LLC v. Marks Paneth LLP, No. 1:18-CV-03845-JFK-SLC (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2019) 

  12/12/2019

  Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration between non-signatory defendant and signatory plaintiff under principle of estoppel. 

• Galloway v. Priority Imports Richmond, LLC., No. 3:19-CV-00209-JAG (E.D. Va. Dec. 12, 2019)

  12/12/2019

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, concluding that the parties entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate and that a prohibition against the award of punitive damages in the agreement did not violate public policy. 

• Chuck Willis v. Tower Loan of Mississippi, L.L.C., No. 18-60344 (5th Cir. Dec. 12, 2019)

  12/12/2019

  Court of appeals reversed decision of district court and bankruptcy court to deny a motion to compel arbitration and remanded the case with instructions to refer it to arbitration. Court held that the parties had reached a valid agreement to arbitrate and had delegated threshold arbitrability issues to the arbitrator. In particular, where the lower courts had determined that procedural differences in two separate arbitration agreements between the parties rendered the agreement to arbitrate insufficiently definite, the court held that the agreements did in fact evidence an “unmistakable” intention to submit disputes to arbitration and that the arbitrator should decide on the procedural issues.

• Tower Loan of Mississippi, LLC v. Willis, No. 18-60344 (5th. Cir. Dec. 12, 2019)

  12/12/2019

  Court of appeals reversed district court’s decision denying motion to compel arbitration, finding that, notwithstanding conflicting procedural details in the applicable arbitration clauses of two related contracts, the parties had reached a valid agreement to arbitrate all disputes and had delegated threshold arbitrability issues to the arbitrator.

• W&W-AFCO Steel, LLC v. SME Steel Contractors., No. 4:19-CV-03042-SBA (W.D. Okla. Dec. 10, 2019) 

  12/10/2019

  Court granted motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration where District Court in Utah had just granted motion to compel arbitration between the same parties, and defendant had requested a stay of the proceedings pending the outcome of both that decision and an on-going AAA arbitration. 

• The Republic of Kazakhstan v. Lawler., No. 2:19-MC-00035-DWL (D. Ariz. Dec. 10, 2019)

  12/10/2019

  Court granted defendant’s motion to seal with regard to particular exhibits it was required to provide in assistance of an investor-state arbitration pursuant to a §1782 motion that had been won by plaintiff. Court found that, upon review, the redactions dealing with the procedure and findings of the arbitral tribunal were appropriate. Court further held that the interest in maintaining confidentiality for the requisite parties in light of a confidentiality order issued by the tribunal outweighed public policy favoring disclosure. 

• Moore v. Performance of Brentwood., No. 3:19-CV-00606 –WLC (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 10, 2019

  12/10/2019

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that a modification provision in the arbitration agreement allowing defendant to unilaterally make “changes that promote the agreement’s purpose” did not render defendant’s promise to arbitrate illusory.

• North Phoenix Road, LLC v. IMortgage.com, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-00676-MC (D. Or. Dec. 9, 2019) 

  12/09/2019

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in commercial office lease dispute, where there was no dispute that the lease contained a valid arbitration agreement. Court found defendant had not waived their right to arbitrate because their conduct was consistent with the right to compel arbitration and plaintiff failed to meet its burden to show prejudice arising from said conduct. 

• Oliveira v. New Prime, Inc., No. 1:15-CV-10603-PBS (D. Mass. Dec. 9, 2019)
   

  12/09/2019

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, holding that defendant had waived its right to arbitrate under the state arbitration law of Missouri. Court found defendant had “substantially invoked the litigation machinery” by litigating for four years their assertion that the FAA applied to the controversy, rather than attempting to compel arbitration under the requisite state arbitration law at the beginning of their suit.
   

• Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Company v. New England Reinsurance Corporation, No. 19-1805 (3d Cir. Dec. 6, 2019)

  12/06/2019

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s order compelling arbitration of the consolidated disputes in question before a new panel of arbitrators. 

• Transworld Medical Devices LLC v. The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, No. 3:18-CV-00580-GCM (W.D.N.C. Dec. 6, 2019)

  12/06/2019

  Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings under the FAA and compelled plaintiff to begin, if it has not already done so, arbitration of its claims for breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, breach of contract, tortious interference, and conspiracy within 60 days.

• City of Almaty, Kazakhstan v. Sater, No. 1:19-CV-02645-AJN-KHP (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2019)

  12/06/2019

  Court denied motion to stay litigation as to defendant Sater pending outcome of an ongoing AAA arbitration. Court found an agreement to arbitrate did not exist where movant was a non-signatory in his personal capacity, but an officer of a signatory to the contract containing the arbitration agreement, and the issues being litigated related to actions taken in movant’s personal capacity. The court also held that movant did not meet his burden to demonstrate that he was an intended third-party beneficiary of the contract containing an arbitration provision. 

• Flynn v. Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation, No. 5:19-CV-00867-JKP-ESC (W.D. Tex. Dec. 5, 2019)

  12/05/2019

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant had not established that it was a third-party beneficiary with authority to enforce the arbitration agreement at issue.

• Rogers v. Clayton Homes Florence, No. 4:19-CV-00570-DCC (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2019)

  12/05/2019

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, holding that a valid arbitration agreement existed, and that all the claims presented fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement.

• Pollak v. Keybank, N.A., No. 1:19-CV-01866-DCN (N.D. Ohio Dec. 5, 2019)

  12/05/2019

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration.  Court found that the arbitration provision was valid and enforceable, and that the claim at issue fell within the scope of the arbitration provision.

• Integrand Assurance Company v. Everest Reinsurance Company, No. 3:19-CV-01111-DRD (D.P.R. Dec. 4, 2019)

  12/04/2019

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration and held that the arbitration clause encompasses the present suit, and considering the strong presumption in favor of arbitration, the court ordered the parties to arbitrate the dispute

• AtriCure, Inc. v. Dr. Jian Meng, No. 1:19-CV-00054-MPB (S.D. Ohio Nov. 4, 2019) 

  11/04/2019

  Court denied in part motion to stay all proceedings pending appeal to the sixth circuit court of appeals, considering the question of whether an appeal of a denial of a motion to compel arbitration automatically divests the district court of jurisdiction over all further proceedings in the matter. The court found that it retained discretionary jurisdiction to consider plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction in the matter.

• Brice v. 7HBF No. 2 LTD., No. 19-CV-01481-WHO (N.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2019) 

  11/04/2019

  Court denied defendant’s motions to stay litigation and to compel arbitration where plaintiffs brought a variety of federal and state statutory claims relating to a lender’s rent-a-tribe scheme to evade state usury laws. Despite the presence of a provision in the arbitration agreement, expressly delegating the question of scope and enforceability to the arbitrator, the court found that arbitration agreement was unenforceable because it acted as a prospective waiver of plaintiffs’ statutory rights and remedies in contravention of public policy. 

• Davila v. UBS Financial Services Incorporated of Puerto Rico, Inc., No. 3:19-CV-01689-CCC (D.P.R. Nov. 1, 2019).

  11/01/2019

  Court granted unopposed motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss claims where financial services contract contained written agreement to Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration. Court found that arbitration agreement was sufficiently broad to cover all of plaintiff’s causes of actions relating to UBS’s alleged mismanagement or breach of duties related to plaintiff’s accounts held with the firm.