Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-00549/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-00549-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Colleen McQuade-Arrequin,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Grand Canyon Education Incorporated, 

Defendant.

No. CV16-00549-PHX-DGC

ORDER 

 The parties have stipulated to stay these proceedings because they have submitted 

to a binding pre-dispute arbitration. Doc. 7. The Court finds that a stay is unnecessary, 

and will instead dismiss the case. 

 A district court has discretion to stay or dismiss an action when it finds that the 

parties’ arbitration agreement is “valid and enforceable.” Nagrampa v. MailCoups, Inc., 

469 F.3d 1257, 1276 (9th Cir. 2006). Some district courts have found that the Ninth 

Circuit favors stays over dismissals. See Tierra Right of Way Servs., Ltd. V. Abengoa 

Solar Inc., No. CV-11-00323-PHX-GMS, 2011 WL 2292007, at *7 (D. Ariz. June 9, 

2011) (citing Bushley v. Credit Suisse First Boston, 360 F.3d 1149, 1153 n.1 (9th Cir. 

2004)). However, a district court does not err by dismissing a case even where neither 

party requests dismissal. Sparling v. Hoffman Const. Co., Inc., 864 F.2d 635, 637-38 (9th 

Cir. 1988); see Cayenne Med., Inc. v. MedShape, Inc., No. 2:14-CV-0451-HRH, 2015 

WL 5363717, at *4 (D. Ariz. Sept. 15, 2015) (holding that “[g]enerally, a stay is 

appropriate but it is within the court’s discretion to dismiss a case” when all claims are 

Case 2:16-cv-00549-DGC Document 8 Filed 04/20/16 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

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 

subject to arbitration) (citing Delgadillo v. James McKaone Enters., Inc., No. 1:12–cv–

1149 AWI MJS, 2012 WL 4027019, at *3 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 12, 2012)). The parties in this 

case have submitted all claims to arbitration. Therefore, the Court will exercise its 

discretion to dismiss the case without prejudice. 

IT IS ORDERED that this case is dismissed without prejudice and the Clerk is 

directed to terminate this action. 

 Dated this 20th day of April, 2016. 

Case 2:16-cv-00549-DGC Document 8 Filed 04/20/16 Page 2 of 2