Morton v. Integrity Motors Inc.

Filing 11

ORDER. Defendant's 7 Motion to Stay and Compel Arbitration is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is granted to the extent it seeks to compel plaintiff to arbitrate the claims that she asserts in this action against defendant. T he parties shall proceed to binding arbitration in a manner consistent with the agreement attached to the motion to compel arbitration. This action shall be administratively closed, subject to reopening for good cause, pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2 . If no party files a stipulation to dismiss the case or a motion to reopen the case on or before 12/1/2013, this case will be dismissed without prejudice without further notice to the parties and without further action by the Court. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 4/19/13.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 13-cv-00464-PAB-KMT
JACQULYN MORTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
INTEGRITY MOTORS INC., d/b/a McDonald Automotive Group,
Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Motion to Stay and Compel
Arbitration [Docket No. 7]. Plaintiff “confesses the Motion” and requests that the case
be “administratively closed pending arbitration.” Docket No. 10 at 1.
In a case involving a written arbitration agreement between the parties that
encompasses the disputes at issue in the litigation, section 3 of the Federal Arbitration
Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3, instructs courts to stay the action “until such arbitration has been had
in accordance with the terms of the agreement.” Upon review of the motion to compel
arbitration and the attachments thereto, the Court concludes that arbitration is
necessary in this case. However, the Court will administratively close this case, subject
to reopening for good cause, rather than granting a stay of proceedings during the
pendency of the arbitration proceedings. See Quinn v. CGR, 828 F.2d 1463, 1465 & n.
2 (10th Cir.1987) (construing closure of case subject to reopening upon a showing of
good cause as the practical equivalent of a stay).

Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Stay and Compel Arbitration [Docket No.
7] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is granted to the extent it
seeks to compel plaintiff to arbitrate the claims that she asserts in this action against
defendant. The motion is denied to the extent that it requests a stay of this action. It is
further
ORDERED that the parties shall proceed to binding arbitration in a manner
consistent with the agreement attached to the motion to compel arbitration. It is further
ORDERED that this action shall be administratively closed, subject to reopening
for good cause, pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2. It is further
ORDERED that not later than twenty days after the completion of the arbitration
proceeding, the parties shall file a status report advising the Court whether they believe
the case should be reopened for good cause for any further proceedings in this Court or
whether the case may be dismissed. It is further
ORDERED that if no party files a stipulation to dismiss the case or a motion to
reopen the case on or before December 1, 2013, this case will be dismissed without
prejudice without further notice to the parties and without further action by the Court.

DATED April 19, 2013.
BY THE COURT:

s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge

2