Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-01814/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-01814-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - 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

George Balady, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Xerox HR Solutions, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 12-01814-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it defendant's motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss or, in

the alternative, to stay proceedings pending arbitration (doc. 5). Plaintiff did not respond and

the time for doing so has expired. 

Plaintiff filed this action in the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County on July

23, 2012, alleging negligence, violation of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and

disability discrimination. Defendant contends that it has a valid arbitration agreement with

plaintiff and plaintiff did not pursue alternative dispute resolution options before filing his

complaint. 

The Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") governs arbitration clauses in contracts that

involve interstate commerce. 9 U.S.C. § 1. There is a strong presumption in favor of

arbitration and "any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues should be resolved in

favor of arbitration." Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24-

25, 103 S. Ct. 927, 941 (1983). 

Case 2:12-cv-01814-FJM Document 9 Filed 09/20/12 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

If the court determines that a valid arbitration agreement exists and it encompasses the

dispute at issue, the court must enforce the agreement. Lifescan, Inc. v. Premier Diabetic

Servs., Inc., 363 F.3d 1010, 1012 (9th Cir. 2004). The dispute resolution plan encompasses

the dispute here because it covers "any dispute or claim concerning [the employee's]

application for employment or the terms and conditions of [the employee's] employment"

(doc. 5, ex. 2 at 11). Plaintiff consented to the agreement. He does not argue that it is

unenforceable or revocable. Therefore, enforcement is mandatory under the FAA.

Although the FAA states that an action should be stayed pending arbitration, 9 U.S.C.

§ 3, we have discretion to dismiss rather than stay claims. Sparling v. Hoffman Constr. Co.,

864 F.2d 635, 638 (9th Cir. 1988). We exercise that discretion in the interest of judicial

economy.

Alternatively, the failure to file a response to a motion "may be deemed a consent to

the . . . granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily." LRCiv

7.2(i). We construe the lack of a response as a concession and grant the motion to dismiss

and compel arbitration summarily. 

IT IS ORDEREDGRANTING defendant's motion to compel arbitration and dismiss

(doc. 5). The parties are ORDERED to proceed to arbitration pursuant to their agreement.

IT IS ORDERED DENYING defendant's motion in the alternative to stay the

proceeding pending arbitration on grounds of mootness (doc. 5). 

IT IS ORDERED DISMISSING this action without prejudice.

DATED this 20th day of September, 2012.

Case 2:12-cv-01814-FJM Document 9 Filed 09/20/12 Page 2 of 2