DXP Enterprises, Inc. v. Goulds Pumps, Inc.
Filing
33
ORDER entered DISMISSING Case. This case is dismissed without prejudice in favor of arbitatrion. Case terminated on 1/29/15(Signed by Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
DXP ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
GOULDS PUMPS, INC.,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-1112
ORDER
On November 4, 2014, the court granted Goulds Pumps, Inc.’s motion to dismiss or to stay
litigation pending arbitration. (Docket Entry No. 30). The court ordered the parties to submit
statements identifying reasons the case should not be dismissed in favor of arbitration.
Goulds Pumps filed a statement in support of dismissal, informing the court that the parties
have begun arbitrating their disputes and that the arbitrator is competent to award injunctive relief.
(Docket Entry No. 31). DXP argues that the court should stay the litigation rather than dismissing
it because the parties might request temporary injunctive relief or final relief confirming an
arbitration award at some point in the future. (Docket Entry No. 32). The court previously denied
DXP’s motion for a preliminary injunction, (Docket Entry No. 25), and there are no other requests
for relief currently pending in this case. Post-arbitration remedies are appropriately sought in a later
action. See Alford v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 975 F.2d 1161, 1164 (5th Cir. 1991) (quoting SeaLand Service, Inc. v. Sea-Land of Puerto Rico, Inc., 636 F. Supp. 750, 757 (D. Puerto Rico 1986)).
This case is dismissed, without prejudice, in favor of arbitration. DXP may re-file if it
1
intends to assert a claim against Goulds Pumps in the future.
SIGNED on January 29, 2015, at Houston, Texas.
______________________________________
Lee H. Rosenthal
United States District Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?