DRAFT Sur-Reply in Opposition to Petition to Vacate - Proposed Order

Source document: DRAFT Sur-Reply in Opposition to Petition to Vacate - Proposed Order; document type: Proposed order and proposed judgment (unsigned template).

Full text

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PETITION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD AND GRANTING
CROSS-PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD; [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
Alexander L. Cheney (SBN 302157)
acheney@willkie.com
Zoe Packman (SBN 347453)
zpackman@willkie.com
333 Bush Street, 34th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 858-7400

Stuart R. Lombardi (admitted pro hac vice)
slombardi@willkie.com
787 7th Avenue
New York, NY 10019
(212) 728-8000

Joshua S. Levy (admitted pro hac vice)
jlevy@willkie.com
1875 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006-1238
(202) 303-1000

Attorneys for Petitioner
Oto Analytics, LLC
OTO ANALYTICS, LLC,
Petitioner,
v.
BENWORTH CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC,
Respondent.
 Case No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING
PETITION TO VACATE ARBITRATION
AWARD AND GRANTING CROSS-
PETITION TO CONFIRM
ARBITRATION AWARD;
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT

Hon. Araceli Martínez-Olguín
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 63-1     Filed 11/20/24     Page 1 of 4

1
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PETITION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD AND GRANTING
CROSS-PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD; [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Before the Court are cross-petitions concerning the Final Award dated June 26, 2024, in
the JAMS arbitration captioned Oto Analytics, Inc. d/b/a Womply v. Benworth Capital Partners
LLC, JAMS Ref. No. 1210038203: Respondent Benworth Capital Partners LLC’s (“Benworth”)
Petition to Vacate Arbitration Award (3:24-cv-04840, ECF No. 1) and Petitioner Oto Analytics,
LLC’s (“Womply”) Cross-Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (3:24-cv-04840, ECF No. 25).
The Court, having carefully considered the submissions, the record, the applicable law, and any
arguments related thereto, hereby orders that Benworth’s Petition to Vacate is DENIED and
Womply’s Cross-Petition to Confirm is GRANTED.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Womply filed a Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award on July 1, 2024, in the above-
entitled action.  (ECF No. 1.)  On August 7, 2024, Benworth filed a Petition to Vacate Arbitration
Award in a new action, Case No. 3:24-cv-04840.  The parties briefed both petitions.  On October
23, 2024, the Court consolidated the two actions and terminated all pending motions.  (ECF No.
57.)  Following a case management conference, and pursuant to the Court’s guidance, the parties
agreed to streamline the briefing on October 31, 2024.  (ECF No. 61.)  The parties agreed, with
the Court’s approval, to: (1) deem Benworth’s Petition to Vacate as the operative motion in this
action; (2) construe Womply’s Opposition (Case No. 3:24-cv-04840, ECF No. 25) as both an
Opposition to Benworth’s Petition to Vacate and a Cross-Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award;
(3) construe Benworth’s Reply (Case No. 3:24-cv-04840, ECF No. 33) as both a Reply in support
of Benworth’s Petition to Vacate and a Response to Womply’s Cross-Petition to Confirm; and
(4) permit Womply to a sur-reply in support of its Opposition.
ANALYSIS
Under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), “a court ‘must’ confirm an arbitration award
‘unless’ it is vacated, modified, or corrected ‘as prescribed’ in §§ 10 and 11.”  Hall Street Assocs.,
L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576, 582 (2008) (citing 9 U.S.C. § 9).  Judicial review of an
arbitrator’s decision is “both limited and highly deferential.”  Schoenduve Corp. v. Lucent Techs.,
Inc., 442 F.3d 727, 730 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Poweragent Inc. v. Elec. Data Sys. Corp., 358
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 63-1     Filed 11/20/24     Page 2 of 4

2
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PETITION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD AND GRANTING
CROSS-PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD; [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
F.3d 1187, 1193 (9th Cir.2004)).  “Neither erroneous legal conclusions nor unsubstantiated
factual findings justify federal court review of an arbitral award.”  Bosack v. Soward, 586 F.3d
1096, 1102 (9th Cir. 2009) (cleaned up).
Vacatur is not warranted here.  See Sanchez v. Elizondo, 878 F.3d 1216, 1221 (9th Cir.
2018) (explaining there “is a very high standard for vacatur”) (cleaned up).  Benworth has not
demonstrated that the Final Award is “completely irrational” or “exhibits a manifest disregard of
the law.”  Id. at 1221–22.  Nor has Benworth shown that the Final Award violates “an explicit,
well-defined, and dominant public policy.”  Va. Mason Hosp. v. Wash. State Nurses Ass’n, 511
F.3d 908, 916 (9th Cir. 2007).  Accordingly, Benworth’s Petition to Vacate is DENIED,
Womply’s Cross-Petition to Confirm is GRANTED, and the Final Award is CONFIRMED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _____________

____________________________

Hon. Araceli Martínez-Olguín

United States District Judge

Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 63-1     Filed 11/20/24     Page 3 of 4

3
[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PETITION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD AND GRANTING
CROSS-PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD; [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
Before the Court are cross-petitions concerning the Final Award dated June 26, 2024, in
the JAMS arbitration captioned Oto Analytics, Inc. d/b/a Womply v. Benworth Capital Partners
LLC, JAMS Ref. No. 1210038203: Respondent Benworth Capital Partners LLC’s (“Benworth”)
Petition to Vacate Arbitration Award (3:24-cv-04840, ECF No. 1) and Petitioner Oto Analytics,
LLC’s (“Womply”) Cross-Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (3:24-cv-04840, ECF No. 25).
The Court, having carefully considered the submissions, the record, the applicable law, and any
arguments related thereto, enters Judgment as follows:
It is hereby ADJUDGED, ORDERED, and DECREED that:
1. Pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., the Final Award, dated June 26, 2024, in the JAMS
arbitration captioned Oto Analytics, Inc. d/b/a Womply v. Benworth Capital Partners
LLC, JAMS Ref. No. 1210038203, is CONFIRMED.
2. Benworth’s Petition to Vacate Final Arbitration Award is DENIED.
3. In conformity with the Final Award, judgment is entered in favor of Oto Analytics,
LLC and against Benworth Capital Partners LLC.

Dated: _____________

____________________________

Hon. Araceli Martínez-Olguín

United States District Judge
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 63-1     Filed 11/20/24     Page 4 of 4

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.cand.431982.63.1.pdf

Size

388,243 bytes

SHA-256

d8d78ead0918adfda0cd06d845ff1bcf61c852d7959818b5b41c52b3e3c3301a

Our copy

gov.uscourts.cand.431982.63.1.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)