Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP v. EngagePoint, Inc.

Filing 14

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 8/8/2017 GRANTING 1 Petition to Confirm an Arbitration Award. The court hereby CONFIRMS the arbitration award and all terms therein and DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment in favor of Petitioner Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP in the amount of $1,544,883.68. CASE CLOSED (Washington, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE,
LLP,
Petitioner,

13

ORDER
v.

14
15

No. 2:17-cv-01163-KJM-KJN

ENGAGEPOINT, INC.,
Respondent.

16
17
18

Before the court is an unopposed petition to confirm an arbitration award and for

19
20

entry of judgement under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1. Petition, ECF No. 1 (filed

21

June 2, 2017). The parties stipulated to have this petition decided on the papers, without a

22

hearing, as Local Rule 230(c) permits. ECF Nos. 12, 13.
Any party to arbitration may petition a federal district court for an order

23
24

confirming the final award. 9 U.S.C. § 9. The petition must be filed within one year of entry of

25

an arbitration award and the petition must include the arbitration agreement and the award itself.

26

Id. § 13. Once received, “the court must grant” the petition unless the award is vacated, modified,

27

or corrected. Id. § 9.

28

/////
1

1

Here, the parties resolved a dispute about unpaid legal fees through arbitration.

2

Riddell Decl. ¶ 3, ECF No. 1-2. On June 1, 2017, the presiding Arbitrator entered a final award

3

for $1,544,883.68 in petitioner’s favor. Id. Ex. A. Petitioner has timely filed all necessary

4

documents for an order confirming the arbitration award. See ECF No 1. The parties also

5

stipulate that there is no dispute regarding this award. Stipulation, ECF No. 12 (June 7, 2017).

6

Lastly, respondent’s attorney, James E. Carbine, declares that “Respondent does not seek to have

7

the Arbitration Award vacated, modified, or corrected[,]” and that “Respondent does not oppose

8

[this] Petition . . .” Carbine Decl. ¶ 7, ECF No. 1-3.

9

Accordingly, having reviewed all documents, the petition is GRANTED. The

10

court, as provided by 9 U.S.C. §§ 9 and 13, hereby CONFIRMS the arbitration award and all

11

terms therein and DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment in favor of Petitioner

12

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP in the amount of $1,544,883.68. The judgment entered

13

“shall be docketed as if it was rendered in an action,” “shall have the same force and effect . . .

14

[as] a judgment in an action,” and “may be enforced as if it had been rendered in an action in the

15

court in which it is entered.” 9 U.S.C. § 13.

16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: August 8, 2017.

18
19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2