Presstek, Inc. v. Agfa-Gevaert N.V.

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: April 18, 1996
• Docket: CV-95-220-M
• Status: Published

Opinion

Presstek, Inc. v . Agfa-Gevaert N.V. CV-95-220-M 04/18/96 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Presstek, Inc., Plaintiff v. Civil N o . 95-220-M

Agfa-Gevaert N.V., Defendant

O R D E R

On January 2 6 , 1996, the court granted defendant's motion to

stay all proceedings in this matter pending arbitration o f : (i)

the proper scope and interpretation of the arbitration clause

contained in a "manufacturing agreement" executed by the parties

(i.e., whether the arbitrator has jurisdiction to hear and

resolve plaintiff's claims); and (ii) if appropriate, the merits

of the parties' underlying disputes. Defendant recently

submitted a status report, which represents that the arbitrator

determined that the parties' underlying disputes are covered by

the arbitration clause and, therefore, that the arbitrator has

jurisdiction to hear and resolve each of plaintiff's claims

against defendant. Given that all issues raised by plaintiff are subject to

binding arbitration, retaining jurisdiction and continuing to

stay this action would seem to serve no purpose. "Any post-

arbitration remedies sought by the parties will not entail

renewed consideration and adjudication of the merits of the

controversy but would be circumscribed to a judicial review of

the arbitrator's award in the limited manner prescribed by law.

See 9 U.S.C. §§ 9-12." Alford v . Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 975

F.2d 1161, 1164 (5th Cir. 1992) (quoting Sea-Land Service, Inc.

v . Sea-Land or Puerto Rico, Inc., 636 F.Supp. 7 5 0 , 757 (D.P.R.

1986)). Accordingly, this case is dismissed under Section 3 of

the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 , without prejudice.

The Clerk of the Court is instructed to close the case. Of

course the parties are free to seek review of any award

eventually entered by the arbitrator.

SO ORDERED.

Steven J. McAuliffe United States District Judge April 1 8 , 1996

cc: George R. Moore, Esq. Daniel s . Ebenstein, Esq. Steven J. Frank, Esq. Theodore A . Breiner, Esq. Garry R. Lane, Esq. A . Hugh Scott, Esq.