International Medcom, Inc. v. S.E. International, Inc.

Filing 48

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S 27 MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/2/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

INTERNATIONAL MEDCOM, INC.,

Case No. 15-cv-03839-HSG

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

S.E. INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S
MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
Re: Dkt. No. 27

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay this action
pending the results of that arbitration. The parties agree that their settlement agreement requires this
dispute to be arbitrated, but disagree about who the arbitrator should be. Dkt. No. 27 at 20; Dkt. No.
33 at 9. The Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, but DENIES the request that
the Court order the parties to arbitrate before Jane Michaels.
The Court’s role in this dispute is clear. The Federal Arbitration Act directs that the Court
“shall on application of one of the parties stay the trial of the action until such arbitration has been had
in accordance with the terms of the agreement.” 9 U.S.C. § 3. As noted above, neither party disputes
the enforceability of the arbitration clause in the Addendum to Basic Terms of Settlement. The
Court therefore orders the parties to meet and confer and to identify an arbitrator of whom both parties
approve. Should the parties fail to agree, the Court orders the parties to submit a joint list of six
arbitrators with curriculum vitaes attached; the Court will select an arbitrator from the list, pursuant to
9 U.S.C. § 5.
The parties are ordered to submit a joint status report with the identified arbitrator or the list of
six arbitrators by December 9, 2015. The parties are advised that referral to the Northern District’s
Alternative Dispute Resolution Program is inappropriate, because arbitration under ADR Local Rule

1

8-1 results in a non-binding judgment, and the arbitration clause in this case requires that arbitration be

2

binding.

3
4
5
6

This action is STAYED, and the Clerk shall administratively close this case. Either party may
petition to reopen the case should appropriate circumstances arise.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 12/2/2015

7
________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2