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

DELL'ORO GROUP, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALAN WECKEL, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:17-cv-00750-JD 

ORDER RE MOTION TO CONFIRM

ARBITRATION AWARD

Re: Dkt. No. 57

Defendants Alan Weckel and 650 Group (“Weckel”) filed a motion to confirm arbitration 

award and enter judgment against plaintiff Dell’Oro Group (“Dell’Oro”). Dkt. No. 57. At the 

August 22, 2019, hearing on the motion, the parties agreed that the final arbitration award should 

be confirmed and judgment entered. Dkt. No. 60. Consequently, Weckel’s motion is granted.

BACKGROUND

Dell’Oro filed this suit against its former employee, Weckel, in February 2017. In April 

2017, Dell’Oro filed an amended complaint, adding Weckel’s new company, 650 Group, as a 

defendant and alleging breach of contract, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; 

unauthorized computer access and fraud; violation of the Defend Trade Secrets Act; and 

misappropriation of trade secrets claims. Dkt. No. 13. The parties are competitors in providing

market research about the telecommunications and related industries. Id. ¶¶ 9, 35.

In May 2017, Weckel filed a motion to arbitrate and stay this action pending completion of 

the arbitration. Dkt. No. 31. Dell’Oro opposed the motion. Dkt. No. 42. The motion to arbitrate 

was granted after the Court found defendants had not waived their right to arbitration by engaging 

in litigation conduct and defendants had standing to invoke the agreement. Dkt. No. 53. After 
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

five days of hearing, the arbitrator issued interim and final awards in favor of Weckel. Dkt. No. 

57-1, Exs. 3, 4. 

Weckel has filed a motion pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 9, 

to confirm the arbitration award and enter judgment. Dkt. No. 57. He has clarified that he seeks 

no fees or costs other than those awarded by the arbitrator. Dkt. No. 59. The arbitrator’s final 

award incorporates the provisions of the interim award, Dkt. No. 57-1, Ex. 3, and also requires 

Dell’Oro to pay $17,817.31. Dkt. No. 57-1, Ex. 4 at ECF p. 36. 

DISCUSSION

A court’s review of an arbitration award under the FAA is “both limited and highly 

deferential.” Coutee v. Barington Capital Grp., L.P., 336 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir. 2003) 

(quoting Sheet Metal Workers’ Int’l Ass’n v. Madison Indus., Inc., 84 F.3d 1186, 1190 (9th Cir. 

1996)). A court must confirm an arbitrator’s award unless one of the following four exceptions 

applies:

(1) where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means;

(2) where there was evident partiality or corruption in arbitrators, or either of them;

(3) where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, 

upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to 

the controversy; or of any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have 

been prejudiced; or

(4) where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a 

mutual, final, and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made.

9 U.S.C. § 10(a).

Neither party suggests that any of the above exceptions apply. Moreover, Dell’Oro does 

not oppose the Court’s entry of an order confirming the final arbitration award and entry of

judgment against it in conformity with that award. Dkt. Nos. 58, 60. In light of Dell’Oro’s nonopposition to the motion, and because none of the exceptions to enforcing the arbitrator’s award 

applies, the motion to confirm the final arbitration award is granted. 
3

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

CONCLUSION

Weckel’s motion to confirm the final arbitration award against Dell’Oro, Dkt. No. 57-1, 

Ex. 4, is granted and judgment will be entered accordingly. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 26, 2019

JAMES DONATO

United States District Judge