US International Arbitration

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

• JLR Global, LLC v. Paypal Holding Co., No. 4:22-CV-00559-ALM (E.D. Tex. Mar. 15, 2023)

  03/15/2023

  Court granted petitioner’s motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA.  Court rejected respondents’ arguments that there was no enforceable arbitration agreement between the parties and that the dispute fell outside the scope of the arbitration clause.  Court stayed all litigation in the lawsuit pending arbitration.

• Manuel Alvarez, Sr. v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., No. 2:19-CV-03343-JS-JMW (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2023)

  03/15/2023

  Court granted petitioner’s motion to compel arbitration involving alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), New York Fair Credit Reporting Act (“NYFCRA”), and New York General Business Law §§ 380 et seq.  Court found that the parties entered into a valid arbitration agreement, the dispute was encompassed by the arbitration agreement, and the petitioner did not waive its right to pursue arbitration through its conduct in litigation.

• Marilyn Azuz v. Accucom Corporation, d/b/a InfoTracer, No. 1:21-CV-01182 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 15, 2023)

  03/15/2023

  Court denied petitioner’s motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA in an action involving alleged violations of Illinois Rights of Publicity Act.  Court rejected petitioner’s arguments that respondent’s agent had actual or apparent authority to enter into an arbitration agreement on behalf of the respondent and that, alternatively, respondent was bound by the arbitration agreement through ratification.

• Shansby v. Edrington, USA, Inc., No. 22-CV-06907-JSC (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2023)

  03/09/2023

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding first that the incorporation of JAMS rules of arbitration into the parties’ arbitration agreement empowered the arbitrator to decide arbitrability and second that plaintiff’s argument that there was no good faith basis that the arbitration agreement governed the parties’ dispute was without merit. 

• Roblox Corp. v. Wowwee Group Limited, No. 22-CV-04476-SI (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2023)

  03/09/2023

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration against non-US residents where the arbitration agreement clearly set out that it was only applicable to US residents.  Court compelled arbitration for the US residents, finding the overall action seeks non-injunctive relief and therefore the injunctive relief exception under the contract was not applicable. 

• Hawthorne Industrial Products Inc. v. M/V Tac Imola, No. 22-CV-01376-RDB (D. Md. Feb. 16, 2023) 

  02/16/2023

  Court denied without prejudice defendants’ motion to stay litigation in favor of arbitration pursuant to the FAA.  Court found it inequitable to bind plaintiff to an arbitration clause in the booking note, because defendants did not prove it was validly incorporated into the bills of lading.  Court concluded that the question of the arbitration clause’s applicability could be addressed again after the conclusion of discovery.

• Phoenix East II Association, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Llyod’s, No. 22-00436-CG-N (S.D. Ala. Feb. 13, 2023)

  02/13/2023

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration finding the arbitration agreement which provided for the application of New York law did not conflict with an Alabama state law that held all insurance contracts executed within the state be governed by Alabama law.

• Silent Gliss Inc. v. Silent Gliss International Ltd., No. 22-CV-00522-EK-MMH (E.D.N.Y. Feb 9, 2023)

  02/09/2023

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that (i) plaintiff failed to allege and substantiate that it was fraudulently induced to enter into agreement to arbitrate; (ii) the parties agreed to arbitrate questions of arbitrability; (iii) defendants did not waive their right to pursue arbitration, and (iv) plaintiff could arbitrate claim against defendants that did not sign the agreement to arbitrate.  Court denied motion to dismiss the case, noting that it will retain jurisdiction and stay the proceedings pending resolution of the arbitration.

• Kronlage Family Limited Partnership v. Independent Specialty Insurance Co., No. 22-CV-01013-NJB-MBN (E.D. La. Jan. 18, 2023)

  01/18/2023

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that there was a valid agreement to arbitrate plaintiff’s claims and that application of equitable estoppel was warranted.  Court also granted motion to stay litigation pending arbitration rather than dismissing plaintiff’s claims because defendants did not explain why dismissal was warranted.

• Academy of the Sacred Heart of New Orleans v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, No. 22-CV-04401-LMA-DPC (E.D. La. Jan. 18, 2023)

  01/18/2023

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that the arbitration agreement between the parties was valid and enforceable.  Court also found that equitable estoppel applied, and that plaintiff must arbitrate its claims against all the defendants, domestic and international.

• 419 Carondelet, LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, No. 22-CV-04311-WMV-DPC (E.D. La. Jan. 10, 2023)

  01/10/2023

  Court granted defendants’ motion to reconsider denial of defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in order to prevent manifest injustice.  Court found that although Louisiana law ordinarily prohibits enforcement of arbitration clauses concerning insurance disputes, the Fifth Circuit has held that the New York Convention supersedes state law.  Court determined that the requirements of the New York Convention were met and therefore, it was required to grant defendants’ motion to compel arbitration.

• APG Worldwide Ltd v. Passfeed Inc., No. 1:22-CV-03078-MKV (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2022)

  12/29/2022

  Court granted motions to compel arbitration and to stay litigation action pending arbitration, finding there was no genuine dispute between the parties regarding either motion.

• Gui Cai v. CMB Export LLC, No. 22-CV-02025-MWF-JPRx (C.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2022)

  12/05/2022

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that the scope of the arbitration agreement between the parties did not encompass the dispute before the court.

• Llagas v. Sealift Holdings Inc., No. 17-CV-00472-JDC-KK (W.D. La. November 8, 2022)

  11/08/2022

  Court granted motion to recognize and enforce arbitral award, finding that (i) plaintiff contractually agreed to resolve all disputes, including United States statutory claims, in arbitration in the Philippines; (ii) plaintiff was not denied a forum and opportunity to raise his claims; and (iii) it was not contrary to public policy for the court to recognize and enforce defendants’ arbitral award.

• Ortis v. Goya Foods, Inc., No. 19-CV-19003-SRC-CLW (D.N.J. Aug. 3, 2022)

  08/03/2022

  Court denied defendant’s motion for class certification excluding putative class members who signed an arbitration amendment to the underlying agreement.  Court found that due to the limited number of remaining putative class members, joinder would be more practicable.

• Burley Foods, LLC v. Bluegrass Ingredients, Inc., No. 21-CV-02160-SRN-LIB (D. Minn. Aug. 2, 2022)

  08/02/2022

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration.  Court found that the arbitration provision of the agreement between the parties was void and unenforceable under the Minnesota Termination of Sales Representatives Act.

• Warrington v. Rocky Patel Premium Cigars, Inc., No. 22-CV-00077-JES-KCD (M.D. Fla. Aug. 1, 2022)

  08/01/2022

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration.  Court found that defendants had waived their right to arbitrate by filing a state action, thereby seeking to avail themselves of the litigation machinery instead of arbitration.

• Preble-Rish Haiti, S.A. v. BB Energy USA, LLC, No. 22-20021 (5th Cir. July 14, 2022)

  07/14/2022

  Court reversed and vacated writ of attachment because lower court erroneously determined that defendant, a Haitian government agency, had explicitly waived its sovereign immunity from prejudgment attachment.  Regardless of whether a contract contains language waiving sovereign immunity from suit generally, waiver of prejudgment attachment must be express, clear, and unambiguous.

• Fantastic Films International, LLC v. Screen Media Ventures, LLC et al., No. 22-CV-01014-FWS-AGR (C.D. Cal. Jul. 12, 2022)

  07/12/2022

  Court granted a motion to compel arbitration in a copyright infringement case. Court found that arbitration provisions in license agreements at issue did not terminate with the expiration of the underlying agreements.

• Outokumpu Stainless Steel USA, LLC v. Coverteam SAS, No. 17-10944 (11th Cir. July 8, 2022)

  07/08/2022

  Court of appeals affirmed the district court’s decision for a non-signatory to enforce an arbitration agreement where the non-signatory was a defined party covered by the arbitration clause.

• The Cornfeld Group, LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, No. 21-CV-62510-FAM (S.D. Fla. June 27, 2022)

  06/27/2022

  Court denied plaintiff’s motion to remand the action to state court and granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration under the New York Convention.  Court found it had jurisdiction under the New York Convention, because plaintiff’s bad faith claim was conceivably related to the parties’ insurance relationship and may fall within the arbitration clause.  Court found that the provision’s delegation clause saved the question of arbitrability for the arbitrator.

• Kuehne + Nagel Inc. v. Baker Hughes, No. 21-CV-8470-KPF (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2022)

  06/23/2022

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay instant action under the FAA.  Court found the arbitration agreement was enforceable, that the dispute fell within its scope, and that the issue of arbitrability was delegated to the arbitrator by incorporation of the ICC and CPR rules.  Court found the arbitration provision was mandatory, although the agreement stated that either party “may” refer the dispute to arbitration 30 days after commencing mediation.

• Consol Pennsylvania Coal Company, LLC v. Mahalaxmi Continental Limited, No. 22-CV-00781-WSH (W.D. Pa. June 14, 2022)

  06/14/2022

  Court granted plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) enjoining defendants from pursuing and the AAA from further processing defendants’ demand for arbitration.  Court found that plaintiff had established more than a reasonable probability of success on the merits that it never agreed to submit to arbitration, that a TRO was necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable harm, that the balance of harms clearly and strongly weighed in favor of plaintiff, and that granting of a TRO was in the public interest.

• Phoenix III Association, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, No. 1:21-CV-00514-TFM-M (S.D. Ala. Apr. 26, 2022)

  04/26/2022

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding the four jurisdictional requirements of the New York Convention were satisfied, as there was an agreement in writing; the arbitration agreement provided for arbitration in New York, a territory of a signatory of the New York Convention; the dispute arose out of an insurance agreement, which is commercial in nature; and at least one of the parties to the insurance agreement was not an American.  Court denied request to dismiss the matter but granted a stay pending arbitration pursuant to the FAA.

• Washington Schools Risk Management Pool v. American Re-Insurance Company, No. 21-CV-00874-LK (W.D. Wash. Apr. 21, 2022)

  04/21/2022

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration after considering whether Washington state law barred application of the New York Convention.  Washington law bars enforcement of certain arbitration clauses in insurance contracts.  Federal statute, by way of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, provides that state insurance law reverse-preempts federal law.  Court found that the New York Convention is not an ‘Act of Congress’ subject to reverse-preemption by the McCarran-Ferguson Act and granted the motion because the arbitration clause was enforceable and the claims arbitrable.

• Conner v. Regions Bank, No. 3:22-CV-00159 (M.D. Tenn. Apr. 19, 2022)

  04/19/2022

  Court found defendant did not waive its agreement to arbitrate, where plaintiff waited to invoke its right to arbitrate for several months until case was transferred to the state circuit court.

• Spliethoff Transport B.V. v. Phyto-Charter Inc., No. 21-1359 (2d Cir. Apr. 15, 2022)

  04/15/2022

  Court of appeals dismissed case for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the district court’s order was not a final appealable decision within the meaning of the FAA because it had deferred a decision on petitioner’s request that the court appoint an arbitrator in the event the parties were unable to agree. 

• Caston v. McAfee, No. 3:21-CV-1890-G-BK (N.D. Tex. Apr. 13, 2022)

  04/13/2022

  Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims and compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA.  Court dismissed the action, rather than stay the proceedings, as all the issues raised by plaintiff were to be submitted to arbitration.

• Ball v. Tesla Motors, Inc., No. 2:22-CV-00005-LA (E.D. Wis. Mar. 31, 2022)

  03/31/2022

  Court granted respondent’s motion to compel arbitration under the FAA, finding that claims of “fraud in the inducement of the contract generally,” as opposed to the arbitration clause itself, must be submitted to the arbitrator.  Court stayed the action pending arbitration.

• Skymark Properties Corporation, Inc. v. Katebian, No. 2:20-CV-12372-SFC-DRG (E.D. Mich. March 14, 2022)

  03/14/2022

  Court issued a report and recommendation denying defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and grant in part and deny as moot in part defendants’ motions to dismiss in a RICO case.  Court found that because the arbitration agreement provided for arbitration in California, the proper course of action was to dismiss claims covered by the agreement without prejudice.  Court found that plaintiffs had failed to sufficiently plead causation for the remaining claims.

• Full Moon Logistics v. Bald Eagle Logistics, Inc., No. 8:21-CV-02695-WFJ-AAS (M.D. Fla. Feb. 16, 2022)

  02/16/2022

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties and plaintiffs did not demonstrate procedural and substantive unconscionability.

• The Branch of Citibank, N.A. Established in the Republic of Argentina v. De Nevares, No. 1:21-CV-06125-VM (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 13, 2022)

  02/13/2022

  Court found that a foreign branch of a banking entity had standing and capacity to bring an action under Rule 12(b)(1) and 17(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  Court granted plaintiff’s request to compel arbitration and issued a preliminary injunction on defendant’s claim in an Argentine court.

• Republic of Kazakhstan v. Chapman, No. 1:21-CV-03507-JGK (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 11, 2022)

  02/11/2022

  Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to remand to state court as to claims by Kazakhstan, but denied the motion as to the remaining plaintiff, finding that the subject matter jurisdiction clause under 9 USC § 203 and remand provision under 9 USC § 205 must be read separately.  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration under the New York Convention as to the remaining plaintiff, finding that an agreement had been formed between the parties and the agreement clearly and unmistakably delegated the issue of arbitrability to the arbitrator. 

• Leo Middle East FZE v. Zhe Zhang, No. 21-CV-03985-CRB (N.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2022)

  01/24/2022

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that plaintiffs and cross-defendants waived their right to arbitration via participation in litigation, and to the extent parallel proceedings might result in inconsistent rulings, plaintiffs and cross defendants created such problem by waiving their right to arbitrate.

• Binh v. King & Spalding LLP, No. 4:21-CV-02234 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 10, 2022)

  01/10/2022

  Court granted motion to dismiss and compel arbitration under the New York Convention, finding that the dispute fell within the scope of the parties’ agreement, and that because the agreement had a broad delegation clause, the issue of arbitrability should be resolved by arbitration.

• Universal Properties Management Use, LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, No. 1:21-CV-23509-JLK (S.D. Fla. Dec. 21, 2021)

  12/21/2021

  Court denied plaintiff’s motion to remand, finding that the arbitration agreement was governed by the New York Convention, and thus the court had jurisdiction.  Court found that the signed application for the insurance policy constituted an agreement in writing.

• Air-Con Inc. v. Daikin Applied Latin America LLC, No. 19-2248 (1st Cir. Dec. 20, 2021)

  12/20/2021

  Court of appeals reversed district court’s order compelling arbitration pursuant to the FAA, finding that the district court impermissibly placed the burden of disproving the existence of a valid arbitral agreement on the non-moving party and did not comply with the requirement to draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-moving party.  Court of appeals concluded that moving party failed to demonstrate the existence of a valid and enforceable agreement to arbitrate the dispute.

• Hatfield v. MM Imports Inc., No. 7:21-CV-00055-REW-EBA (E.D. Ky. Dec. 15, 2021)

  12/15/2021

  Court granted motions to dismiss and compel arbitration under the FAA, finding a valid and enforceable agreement to arbitrate.

• CMB Infrastructure Group IX LP v. Cobra Energy Investment Finance Inc., No. 21-CV-00214-JAD-DJA (D. Nev. Nov. 15, 2021)

  11/15/2021

  Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, finding that (i) an arbitration agreement existed, (ii) the dispute fell within the scope of such agreement, and (iii) both signatory and nonsignatory parties to the agreement may compel or be compelled to arbitrate the claims in the case.

• CMB Infrastructure Group IX, LP v. Cobra Energy Investment Finance, Incorporated, No. 21-CV-00214-JAD-DJA (D. Nev. Nov. 15, 2021)

  11/15/2021

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration for certain claims, finding that the arbitration clause remained active after termination of the agreement and that both signatory and non-signatory defendants could compel arbitration.

• Rohm Semiconductor USA LLC v. Maxpower Semiconductor Inc., No. 21-1709 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 12, 2021)

  11/12/2021

  Court of appeal affirmed decision compelling arbitration and dismissing declaratory judgment action, finding that (i) the underlying agreement was not ambiguous; (ii) the dispute was international; and (iii) the parties intended to delegate arbitrability to an arbitrator.

• ADT, L.L.C. v. Richmond, No. 21-10023 (5th Cir. Nov. 11, 2021)

  11/11/2021

  Court vacated lower court’s dismissal for want of diversity jurisdiction, holding that between the parties there was a binding agreement to arbitrate. Court remanded the case for the district court to determine if a third-party who might defeat diversity jurisdiction should be joined as indispensable.

• FMC Corporation v. Syngenta Crop Protection AG, No. 21-CV-00487 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 11, 2021)

  11/11/2021

  Court granted motion to dismiss ruling in a patent dispute case.  Court held that the arbitration clause in the parties’ collaboration agreement clearly required the parties to submit their claims to binding arbitration.

• Micula v. Government of Romania, No. 17-CV-02332-APM (D.D.C. Nov. 8, 2021)

  11/08/2021

  Court granted motion to enter judgment in favor of petitioners for accrued sanctions.  Court found that by not answering petitioners’ interrogatories within 14 days, respondent had failed to fulfill the conditions that would allow them to avoid imposition of at least some of the accrued sanctions.

• Hermes of Paris, Inc. v. Swain, No. 20-3451 (2nd Cir. Nov. 8, 2021)

  11/08/2021

  Court affirmed lower court’s confirmation of arbitration award dismissing respondent-appellant’s claims as untimely.  Court found that limitations defenses were arbitrable under the parties’ arbitration agreement because the presumption of arbitrability was not rebutted by any express language in the contract. Court also upheld an anti-filing injunction given petitioner-appellees history of vexatious and duplicative litigation.

• Hawley v. Boysen, No. 20-CV-02562-JWL-TJJ (D. Kan. Nov. 4, 2021)

  11/04/2021

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration in a breach of contract case.  Court found that there was no meeting of the minds on the question of mandatory arbitration and that therefore there was no arbitration agreement to enforce.

• Nu-X Ventures v. SBL LLC dba Global Cannabinoids, No. 21-CV-0354-GNS (W.D .Ky. October 21, 2021)

  10/21/2021

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a contract dispute regarding the shipment of cannabinoid gummies.  Court found the arbitration clause was validly part of the contract and plaintiff could not rebut the presumption that the arbitration clause was enforceable because the clause mirrored one in another contract signed by plaintiff and plaintiffs’ business was sophisticated enough to have read the arbitration clause despite the fact that it was not conspicuous.

• Weinstein v. Katapult Group Inc., No. 21-CV-05175-PJH (N.D. Cal. October 15, 2021)

  10/15/2021

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in a contract dispute arising out of an acquisition.  Court found no “hint” of the parties’ intent to arbitrate disputes in the acquisition documents.

• Martinique Properties LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, No. 21-CV-00209-BCB-SMB (D. Neb. October 15, 2021)

  10/15/2021

  Court held appraisal provision in insurance policy constituted an arbitration agreement under the FAA.  Court also found that complainant failed to sufficiently allege grounds to vacate the insurance award under the New York Convention because complainant failed to allege incapacity, improper notice, or that the award did not accord with the relevant agreement.

• Cheruvoth v. Seadream Yacht Club Inc., No. 20-14450 (11th Cir. Oct. 6, 2021)

  10/06/2021

  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.