Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00136/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00136-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 896
Nature of Suit: Other Statutes - Arbitration
Cause of Action: 09:1 U.S. Arbitration Act

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES INC.,

Petitioner,

v.

MACARIO B. MONTOYA,

Respondent.

Case No. 15-cv-00136-JST 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

In this action, Petitioner UBS Financial Services, Inc. (“UBS”) seeks: (1) an order 

confirming the arbitration award issued by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority 

(“FINRA”) Dispute Resolution arbitration panel in a binding arbitration between UBS and 

Respondent Marcario B. Montoya, and entering judgment upon the FINRA arbitration award in its 

entirety; (2) post-award, pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest; and (3) attorneys’ fees 

and costs incurred by UBS in its continuing efforts to collect the award. ECF No. 2 at 1. UBS 

filed its petition and a motion to confirm the arbitration award on January 9, 2015. ECF No. 2. 

Defendant has not yet appeared. The motion was set for hearing before the undersigned on April 

9, 2015. ECF No. 16. Having found the matter suitable for disposition without oral argument, the 

Court vacated the motion hearing on March 31, 2015. ECF No. 23. 

Although it is nowhere mentioned in UBS’s petition, motion, reply, or case management 

statement, ECF Nos. 1, 2, 20, 24, it has come to the Court’s attention that a petition to confirm the 

same arbitration award, filed by the same Petitioner, represented by the same law firm, was 

previously considered in a separate action in this Court under Case No. 14-mc-80124-WHA. In 

that case, which was filed on May 1, 2014, and closed on June 24, 2014, the Court granted UBS’s 

petition to confirm the arbitration award and enter judgment thereon; granted in part the request 

for pre-judgment interest; granted the request for post-judgment interest; and denied the request 

Case 3:15-cv-00136-JST Document 27 Filed 05/07/15 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

for attorney’s fees and costs. UBS Financial Servs. Inc. v. Montoya, No. 14-mc-80124-WHA, 

2014 WL 2876688, at *4 (N.D. Cal. June 24, 2014). 

The doctrine of res judicata bars claims that were raised or could have been raised in a

prior action. See F.T.C. v. Garvey, 383 F.3d 891, 897 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, Petitioner is 

ordered to show cause why this action is not barred by the entry of final judgment in Case No. 14-

mc-80124. The Court further orders counsel to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed 

for failure to alert the Court to the previous adjudication of this matter. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b); 

Cal. Rules of Prof’l Conduct 5-200(b); N.D. Cal. Civ. R. 3-12, 11-4; see also Townsend v. 

Holman Consulting Corp., 929 F.2d 1358, 1362 (9th Cir. 1990) (“sanctions must be imposed on

the signer of a paper if either a) the paper is filed for an improper purpose, or b) the paper is 

‘frivolous.’ The word ‘frivolous’ . . . [is] used to denote a filing that is both baseless and made 

without a reasonable and competent inquiry.” (internal citation omitted)). Petitioner shall file a 

response to this order by May 18, 2015, and shall appear for a hearing on this order on May 26, 

2015 at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 7, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-00136-JST Document 27 Filed 05/07/15 Page 2 of 2