Verasonics, Inc. v. Alpinion Medical Systems Co., Ltd.

Filing 40

ORDER granting Plaintiff's 32 Motion to confirm arbitration award. Signed by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM)

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9
10
11

VERASONICS, INC., a Washington
corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. C14-1820-JCC
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONFIRM ARBITRATION
AWARD

12
13

ALPINION MEDICAL SYSTEMS
CO., LTD, a Korean corporation,

14

Defendant.

15
16

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Verasonics, Inc.’s unopposed motion to

17

confirm arbitration (Dkt. No. 32). Having thoroughly considered the briefing and the relevant

18

record, the Court finds oral argument unnecessary and hereby GRANTS the motion for the

19

reasons explained herein.

20

In June 2016, arbitrator John Fellas heard Verasonics’ claims against Defendant Alpinion

21

Medical Systems for (1) breach of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), (2) breach of a “Lease

22

and Non-Exclusive License Agreement,” and (3) violation of the Washington Uniform Trade

23

Secrets Act. (Dkt. No. 32 at 2–3.) On March 2, 2017, Mr. Fellas determined that Alpinion

24

violated the NDAs and lease agreements, granted injunctive relief in Verasonics’ favor and

25

awarded it monetary damages of $2,914,000.00, and denied or dismissed all remaining claims

26

except that for attorney fees. (Id. at 2.)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONFIRM
ARBITRATION AWARD
PAGE - 1

1

Under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), if a party to an arbitration asks the appropriate

2

U.S. District Court “for an order confirming the [arbitration] award, . . . the court must grant

3

such an order unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected as prescribed in sections 10 and

4

11 of this title.” 9 U.S.C. § 9. The Court’s review of an arbitration award is narrow: sections 10

5

and 11 of the FAA permit a federal court to

6
7
8

correct a technical error, [] strike all or a portion of an award pertaining to an issue
not at all subject to arbitration, [or] vacate an award that evidences affirmative
misconduct in the arbitral process or the final result or that is completely irrational
or exhibits a manifest disregard for the law.

9

Kyocera Corp. v. Prudential-Bache Trade Services, Inc., 341 F.3d 987, 997–98 (9th Cir. 2003).

10

None of the conditions permitting vacation, modification, or correction of the award are

11

present here. There is no evidence of technical errors, issues beyond the scope of arbitration,

12

affirmative misconduct, or an arbitral process or result that is irrational or disregards the law.

13

Alpinion does not oppose this motion and thus raises no argument to the contrary. The Court

14

confirms the award under the FAA.

15

The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New

16

York Convention) governs confirmation of foreign arbitral awards. June 10, 1958, 21 U.S.T.

17

2517. The Court “shall confirm the [arbitration] award unless it finds one of the grounds for

18

refusal or deferral of recognition or enforcement of the award specified in the said Convention.”

19

9 U.S.C. § 207. Under the New York Convention, seven grounds exist for refusal or deferral of

20

enforcement. New York Convention art. V. “These defenses are construed narrowly, and the party

21

opposing recognition or enforcement bears the burden of establishing that a defense applies.”

22

Ministry of Defense and Support for the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran v. Cubic

23

Defense Systems, Inc., 665 F.3d 1090, 1096 (9th Cir. 2011). Alpinion did not oppose the motion and

24

thus does not show that a defense applies. The Court confirms the award under the New York

25

Convention.

26
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONFIRM
ARBITRATION AWARD
PAGE - 2

1

In sum, the motion to confirm the arbitration award (Dkt. No. 32) is GRANTED. The

2

Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of Verasonics and against Alpinion in

3

accordance with the terms of the arbitration award.

4

DATED this 19th day of May, 2017.

7

A

8

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5
6

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONFIRM
ARBITRATION AWARD
PAGE - 3