Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00458/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00458-3/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, 

INC.,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL VALDOVINOS, 

Respondent.

Case No. 1:23-cv-00458-KES-CDB

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT 

PETITION TO CONFIRM FINAL 

ARBITRATION AWARD AND FOR ENTRY 

OF JUDGMENT

Docs. 1, 17

On March 24, 2023, Petitioner Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a 

petition to confirm a final arbitration award and for entry of judgment against Michael 

Valdovinos (“Respondent”). Doc. 1. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate 

judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302. 

Respondent did not respond to the petition. In petitioner’s unopposed motion to continue 

a scheduling conference, Doc. 11, petitioner noted that on June 15, 2023, petitioner, acting 

through pro hac vice counsel, spoke with respondent on the phone. Id. at 2. “[Respondent] stated 

that he does not oppose confirmation of the arbitration award and does not want to participate in 

the scheduling conference.” Id.

On May 8, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations to 

grant the petition to confirm final arbitration award and for entry of judgment. Doc. 17. The 

Case 1:23-cv-00458-KES-CDB Document 19 Filed 01/17/25 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

assigned magistrate judge found the arbitration award was supported by law and there was no 

basis to correct, modify, or vacate the final award. Id. at 5. The findings and recommendations 

contained notice that any objections were due within fourteen days after service of the order and 

that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on 

appeal. Id. at 6 (quoting Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014)). Respondent

did not file objections and the deadline to do so has passed. 

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de novo review of 

this case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes that the findings and 

recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations entered on May 8, 2024, Doc. 17, are adopted 

in full;

2. Petitioner’s petition to confirm final arbitration award and for entry of judgment, 

Doc. 1, is granted;

3. The final arbitration award in favor of petitioner and against respondent, Doc. 1-4, 

is confirmed in all respects; and

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 16, 2025 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-00458-KES-CDB Document 19 Filed 01/17/25 Page 2 of 2