Coinbase, Inc. v. Sherrer

Filing 20

ORDER OF DISMISSAL... For the foregoing reasons, Coinbase's petition to confirm the Award dismissing with prejudice Sherrer's claims under the EFTA is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment in favor of Petitioner and to close the case. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 11/25/2024) (jjc) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

fraud, or undue means;” there existed “evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrator[];” the
arbitrator exhibited “misconduct” that “prejudiced” a party; the arbitrator “exceeded [his]
powers;” or there was “an evident material miscalculation of figures or an evident material
mistake in the description of any person, thing, or property referred to in the award.” Id. §§ 10–
11.
“It is well established that courts must grant an [arbitrator’s] decision great deference.”
Duferco Int’l Steel Trading v. T. Klaveness Shipping A/S, 333 F.3d 383, 388 (2d Cir. 2003).
Confirmation of an arbitration award is, therefore, generally “a summary proceeding that merely
makes what is already a final arbitration award a judgment of the court.” D.H. Blair, 462 F.3d at
110 (citation omitted). “[T]he showing required to avoid confirmation is very high.” Id. Indeed,
“[t]he arbitrator’s rationale for an award need not be explained, and the award should be
confirmed if a ground for the arbitrator’s decision can be inferred from the facts of the case.
Only a barely colorable justification for the outcome reached by the arbitrator[] is necessary to
confirm the award.” Id. (quotation marks and citations omitted).
“[A] district court should treat an unanswered . . . petition to [confirm an arbitration
award] as an unopposed motion for summary judgment.” Id. Summary judgment is appropriate
when the record shows that there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the moving party is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S.
317, 322–23 (1986). A court must consider all evidence in the light most favorable to the
nonmoving party, Overton v. N.Y. State Div. of Mil. & Naval Affs., 373 F.3d 83, 89 (2d Cir.
2004), and must “resolve all ambiguities and draw all permissible factual inferences in favor of
the party against whom summary judgment is sought,” Sec. Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Old Dominion
Freight Line, Inc., 391 F.3d 77, 83 (2d Cir. 2004). Although Sherrer has not appeared in this
action, the Court must still “examin[e] the moving party’s submission to determine if it has met
its burden of demonstrating that no material issue of fact remains for trial.” D.H. Blair, 462 F.3d
at 110 (citation omitted).
II.

Analysis

Coinbase argues that it is entitled to confirmation of the Award. ECF Nos. 1, 12, 18.
The Court agrees.
Coinbase has carried its burden to demonstrate that there is no genuine dispute of
material fact regarding the validity of the arbitration award. The Award provides far more than a
“barely colorable justification for the outcome reached,” D.H. Blair, 462 F.3d at 110 (citation
omitted), and none of the reasons for vacating or modifying the award under 9 U.S.C. § 10 or
§ 11 apply. It is also clear that the parties’ agreement compelled them to arbitrate disputes
arising out of their relationship. ECF No. 1-2 at 12 ¶ 7.3; ECF No. 1-2 at 33–35 ¶¶ 1.1, 1.4, 1.6.
Accordingly, the Court confirms the Award.

2

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Coinbase’s petition to confirm the Award dismissing with
prejudice Sherrer’s claims under the EFTA is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully
directed to enter judgment in favor of Petitioner and to close the case.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 25, 2024
New York, New York

3