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

• Taylor v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-04526 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 15, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendants had not waived right to arbitration by filing motion to compel arbitration only four months after they had removed case to federal court, and after they had participated in Rule 16 conference. Court also found that arbitration agreement was not non-mutual or unconscionable. 

• Asia Maritime Pacific Chartering Ltd. v. A. Cayume Hakh & Sons, No. 1:19-CV-24919-BB (S.D. Fla. Mar. 16, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court construed motion to dismiss as a motion to compel arbitration and granted motion, finding that defendant had not waived right to arbitrate by requesting a dismissal of the complaint instead of filing a motion to compel arbitration. Court held that although defendant had filed a motion to dismiss, it was more properly viewed as a motion to compel arbitration. Court also held that defendant had not waived its right to arbitration because defendant’s conduct had not been inconsistent with the right to arbitration, nor had defendant substantially invoked the litigation machinery.

• Boss Worldwide LLC v. Beau Crabill, No. 7:19-CV-02363-VB (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 16, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court construed motion to dismiss as a motion to compel arbitration and granted motion, finding that the statutory claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement, and that there was no indication that Congress precluded such claims from arbitration.

• Card v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 3:19-CV-1515-SI (D. Or. Mar. 16, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that there was a genuine dispute of material fact over the existence of the arbitration agreement since defendant had not established, among others, that the customer agreements containing the arbitration agreement had been delivered to plaintiff or brought to plaintiff’s attention. Court directed an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a valid arbitration agreement existed.

• Arena v. Intuit Inc., No. 3:19-CV-02546-CRB (N.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that defendant’s terms of service were too inconspicuous to give plaintiffs constructive notice of the arbitration provision, and thus there was no agreement to the provision.

• Christmas Lumber Company, Inc. v. NWH Roof & Floor Truss Systems, LLC, No. 3:19-CV-00055-HBG (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 12, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the agreement containing the arbitration provision was separate from the contract under which plaintiff’s claims were brought.  Court found that the arbitration agreement made no reference to the disputed contract and thus that plaintiff’s claims were not subject to arbitration.

• Brickstructures, Inc. v. Coaster Dynamix, Inc., No. 19-2187 (7th Cir. Mar. 11, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court of appeals affirmed judgment denying motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant’s withdrawal of an arbitration demand in response to plaintiff’s threat of sanctions constituted a waiver of defendant’s right to arbitrate. 

• Marroquin v. Dan Ryan Builders Mid-Atlantic, LLC, No. 5:19-CV-00083-EKD (W.D. Va. Mar. 11, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that an arbitration clause which allowed defendant to initiate arbitration in any United States jurisdiction was not sufficiently one-sided to be considered unconscionable. 

• Vinjarapu v. Gadiyaram, No. 1:19-CV-03306-ADC (D. Md. Mar. 11, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration finding that nonsignatory defendants had an independent right to compel plaintiff’s claims to arbitration when the claims related to the operation of the contract containing the arbitration agreement. Court additionally found that the issue of whether the arbitration agreement was entered into fraudulently was for the arbitrator to decide. 

• Drasal v. Pilot Traveling Centers, LLC, No. 2:19-CV-00981-KWR-CG (D.N.M. Mar. 10, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that a valid arbitration agreement existed when, inter alia, plaintiff signed other documents contingent on assent to the arbitration agreement and plaintiff performed under the employment contract containing the arbitration clause. 

• Leja v. Brosseau Management Co., LLC, No. 3:19-CV-00269-BAJ-EWD (M.D. La. Mar. 10, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court denied defendants’ motion to compel arbitration finding, inter alia, that defendants waived their right to arbitrate by ignoring correspondence from plaintiff seeking to initiate arbitration proceedings. 

• Federico v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, No. 1:20-CV-00027-DAP (N.D. Ohio Mar. 9, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, finding that plaintiff’s claims were arbitrable when there was a mutual waiver of trial rights.  Court additionally found that plaintiff’s claims against a nonsignatory of the arbitration agreement were arbitrable when there was an agency relationship between the signatory defendant and the nonsignatory defendant.

• Whispering Pines West Condominium Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, No. 1:19-CV-03238-REB-MEH (D. Colo. Mar. 6, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that language submitting disputes “regarding any aspect of this Policy” covered the plaintiff’s statutory claims.  Court found that where the parties did not expressly agree to arbitrate arbitrability, the issue of arbitrability was one for the court.

• Herskovic v. Verizon Wireless, No. 1:19-CV-03372-AMD-RML (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 2020)

  03/19/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding, inter alia, that reference to the FAA evidences that parties’ intent for the Act to apply to the arbitration agreement. Court additionally found that defendant’s removal of the case to federal court was not sufficient participation in litigation to constitute waiver of the right to arbitrate.

• Marbaker v. Statoil USA Onshore Properties, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-01528 (3d Cir. Feb. 13, 2020)

  02/13/2020

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of motion to compel class arbitration, finding that bilateral arbitration clause in lease agreement between defendant and plaintiffs did not provide consent necessary for court to compel class arbitration to resolve disputes across multiple similar leases as a class.

• Roberts v. Harley Davidson Financial Services, Inc., No. 4:19-CV-00841-SRB (W.D. Mo. Feb. 13, 2020)

  02/13/2020

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding no reason to reopen state court’s prior dismissal of motion to compel arbitration. Prior to removal of case to federal court, defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration, which was dismissed by state court. Defendant did not appeal against state court’s decision. Defendant filed a second motion to compel arbitration after removal. Court held that, in view of law-of-the-case doctrine, it would not exercise its discretion to reopen state court’s prior order.

• Calderon v. Sixt Rent A Car, LLC, No. 0:19-CV-6408-AHS (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2020)

  02/12/2020

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that arbitration agreement did not bind defendant car rental companies. One plaintiff reserved and rented a car from defendants through a website operated by a third party. Court found that arbitration agreement in terms of use between third party and the plaintiff did not bind defendants, who were not party to terms of use.

• Abgara v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, No. 1:19-CV01823-TSC (D.D.C. Feb. 11, 2020)

  02/11/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that plaintiff’s negligence claim and statutory claim under the Cable Communications Policy Act fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement between plaintiff and defendants.

• Troia v. Tinder, Inc., No. 4:19-CV-01647-RLW (E.D. Mo. Feb. 10, 2020)

  02/10/2020

  Court granted motion to compel individual arbitration, finding that claims against Tinder for discriminatory pricing and use of unconscionable contract provisions were arbitral, and that question of whether enforcement of arbitration agreement was unconscionable had been delegated to arbitrator. Court held that plaintiff was bound by arbitration agreement in the terms of use, which plaintiff had agreed to when creating his account.

• TIG Insurance Company v. American Home Assurance Company, No. 1:18-CV-10183-VSB (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 7, 2020)

  02/07/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that dispute between plaintiff and two of three defendants fell within scope of broad arbitration agreement between those parties. Court stayed action against remaining defendant, which was not party to the arbitration agreement, pending completion of arbitration.

• Neubauer-Perkins, Inc. v. Jason Walters & Associates, LLC, No. 1:19-CV-00821 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 7, 2020)

  02/07/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant (“Associates”) was bound by arbitration agreement in related contracts between plaintiffs and other defendants. Even though contract between plaintiffs and Associates contained a forum selection clause requiring all litigation to proceed in the state or federal courts in Cook County, court found that it could not have been the intent of the parties to require plaintiffs to pursue claims against Associates in federal court while they pursued same theories of liability against other defendants under related contracts in arbitration.

• Edmonds v. Nexus RV LLC, No. 2:19-CV-05348-JCJ (E.D. Pa. Feb. 7, 2020)

  02/07/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that dispute between plaintiff purchaser and defendant dealer fell within arbitration clause in contract of sale.

• Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company v. Anthem, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-03589 (S.D. Ind. Jan. 31, 2020)

  01/31/2020

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings and granted plaintiff’s motion to stay the arbitration.  Court found that the agreement obligated the parties to submit their dispute to only one of two possible methods of ADR, and having submitted the dispute to mediation, defendant could not now also compel plaintiffs to arbitrate. Court further found that there was a question of fact as to whether the parties’ participation in mediation in a forum different from that specified in their agreement modified the agreement, thus they could not grant the motion to compel under the summary judgment standard. 

• Kelch v. Pyramid Hotel Group, No. 1:18-CV-00707-TSB (S.D. Ohio Jan. 30, 2020)

  01/30/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case.  Plaintiff did not oppose the motion to compel arbitration but argued that the case should be stayed rather than dismissed.  Court disagreed and held that because all claims were subject to arbitration, dismissal was appropriate.

• Benson v. Double Down Interactive, LLC, No. 18-36015 (9th Cir. Jan. 29, 2020)

  01/29/2020

  Court of appeals affirmed the district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of putative class claims related to the downloading through the Apple app store and playing of a mobile game.  Court found that under Washington state law the terms of use containing the arbitration provision were not sufficiently conspicuous to give a reasonably prudent user constructive notice and thus there was no mutual assent to arbitrate.

• Borror Property Management, LLC v. Oro Karric North, LLC, No. 2:19-CV-04375-ALM-EPD (D. Ohio Jan. 29, 2020)

  01/29/2020

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, holding that defendants had waived their right to compel arbitration when they wrote to plaintiff threatening to sue and indicated that their reading of the arbitration agreement did not “limit litigation exclusively to arbitration.”  Defendants’ letter further invited plaintiff to waive any right it had to compel arbitration.  Court found that it would prejudice plaintiffs to allow defendants to invoke the arbitration provisions.

• Falkner v. Dolgencorp, LLC., No. 2:19-CV-00598-GMB (N.D. Ala. Jan. 29, 2020)

  01/29/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings of various tort claims against plaintiff’s former employer.  Court rejected plaintiff’s contention that she had not seen or signed an arbitration agreement, finding that there was no dispute of material fact after considering the evidence of an initialed agreement provided by defendant.

• Villa v. Gruma Corporation, No. 1:19-CV-01721-DAD-BAM (E.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2020)

  01/28/2020

  Court granted defendant’s unopposed motion to compel arbitration and dismiss a wrongful termination claim.  Court found that defendant met its burden in demonstrating that a valid agreement to arbitrate existed and covered the dispute at issue.  Court further found that because all claims were subject to arbitration, dismissal was appropriate.

• Willis  v. Fitbit, Inc., No. 3:19-CV-01377 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2020)

  01/27/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding plaintiff’s argument that the arbitration agreements were procedurally and substantively unconscionable, that the language in the parties’ agreements evidenced a clear an unmistakable intent to delegate threshold issues like arbitrability to the arbitrators, and the arguments related to unconscionability were not specific to the delegation provision.

• Wainwright v. Melaleuca, Inc., No. 2:19-CV-02330-JAM-DB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2020)

  01/27/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and dismiss a putative class action alleging violations of the California labor code.  Court found that the contract clearly delegated questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator.

• MGP Electronics, Inc. v. Electronic Design & Sales, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-00483-HAB-SLC (D. Ind. Jan. 24, 2020)

  01/24/2020

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration of defendant’s counterclaims and stayed the proceedings.  Parties agreed a valid arbitration agreement governed the contract, and court rejected defendant’s argument that it’s counterclaim for defamation arose after the agreement was terminated and was thus outside the scope of the arbitration clause.  Court found that the alleged defamation arose from the parties business relationship which was subject to the arbitration agreement. 

• Katz v. The Rittenhouse Organization, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-00546-MN (D. Del. Jan. 23, 2020)

  01/23/2020

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that plaintiff’s claims must be arbitrated when the agreement provided that either party may request arbitration, and rejecting plaintiff’s argument that his claims must be litigated because he chose litigation in lieu of arbitration.

• Doe v. Epic Games, Inc., No. 4:19-CV-03629-YGR (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2020)

  01/23/2020

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that a minor plaintiff validly disaffirmed the arbitration agreement after sending letters with the intent to repudiate the binding force of the agreement and subsequently filed suit.

• Solo v. United Parcel Service Co., No. 17-2244 (6th Cir. Jan. 23, 2020)

  01/23/2020

  Court of appeals confirmed a district court’s denial of appellant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the parties did not intend to arbitrate claims predating the arbitration agreement.  Court held that district court properly concluded that appellant waived its right to arbitrate when it filed a motion to dismiss seeking a decision on the merits.

• 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.