Review of Court Decisions

Dispute Resolution Journal, February-April 2011 | Go to article overview

Review of Court Decisions


INTERNATIONAL

Removal Authority

In a case of first impression in the 9th Circuit, the appeals court ruled that a district court has re - moval jurisdiction under 9 U.S.C. § 205 where the defendant argued collateral estoppel as an affirmative defense based on an arbitration award falling under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The 9th Circuit reasoned that removal jurisdiction existed because the arbitration agreement "related to" the subject matter of the action and could conceivably affect the outcome of the plaintiff's suit.

This case arose from a dispute over medical licensing rights between Appellant Infuturia Global Ltd., of the British Virgin Islands, and Yissum Research and Development Co., of Israel.

In 1998, Infuturia sued Sequus Pharmaceuticals of California, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Pro - fessor Yechezkel Barenholz in a California state court alleging tortious interference with that license. The state court stayed the suit pending arbitration. An arbitration took place in Israel. The arbitrator determined that (1) Infuturia's license was valid, (2) Yissum had not breached the license, and (3) Infuturia did not have rights to any patents and products relating to a Sequus license. After the arbitration, the California state court lifted the stay. Infuturia filed an amended complaint similar to the original complaint. The University and Barenholz subsequently filed a notice of removal (in which Sequus joined), under 9 U.S.C. § 205. Infuturia argued that re moval was improper because the defendants were not parties to the arbitration agreement between Infuturia and Yissum. The court denied the motion to remand. However, the district court found that removal was proper because the litigation "relates to" the arbitration provision and that provision falls under the New York Convention. The district court also ordered Infuturia to file a second amended complaint identifying the Sequus products, compounds, or inventions that allegedly infringed Infuturia's license with Yissum. Infuturia filed a second amended complaint on March 2009 asserting only tortious interference and conversion claims and only named Sequus as a defendant. In its answer, Sequus raised collateral estoppel as a defense, arguing that these issues had already been resolved against it the Israeli arbitration. Sequus also moved to dismiss under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim and failure to join a necessary party. The district court granted both motions on June 1, 2009. Infuturia appealed, asserting that removal was improper. The 9th Circuit affirmed.

Title 9 U.S.C. § 205 provides that federal courts have removal jurisdiction:

[w]here the subject matter of an action or proceeding pending in a State court relates to an arbitration agreement or award falling under the Con vention.... The procedure for removal of causes otherwise provided by law shall apply, except that the ground for removal provided in this section need not appear on the face of the complaint but may be shown in the petition for removal.

The court agreed with the interpretation of the phrase "relates to" in § 205 by the 5th Circuit, the only federal appeals court to rule on that point. That interpretation holds that "whenever an arbitration agreement falling under the Convention could conceivably affect the outcome of the plaintiff's case, the agreement 'relates to' the plaintiff's suit."

The 9th Circuit also found that nothing in § 205 urged a narrower construction of the remand statute. Accordingly, because Sequus raised an affirmative defense "relat[ing] to" the Infuturia-Yissum arbitral award, the 9th Circuit found that the district court had removal jurisdiction under § 205.

Infuturia Global Ltd. v. Sequus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 631 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. Feb. 7, 2011).

CALI FORNIA REFERENCE AGREEMENT

Court's Discretion to Refuse Enforcement

The Supreme Court of California held that, under Code of Civil Procedure § 638, a trial court has discretion to refuse to enforce a predispute agreement providing that a referee may hear and decide certain contested issues. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Review of Court Decisions
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.