Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 272.0

529US1

Unit: $U37

[09-26-01 08:37:34] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 193 (2000)

197

Opinion of the Court

Valley Typographical Union No. 46 v. McClatchy Newspa-
pers, 762 F. 2d 741, 744 (CA9 1985) (§ 10 mandatory); Island
Creek Coal Sales Co. v. Gainesville, 729 F. 2d 1046, 1049–
1050 (CA6 1984) (§ 9 mandatory); Sunshine Beauty Supplies,
Inc. v. United States District Court, Central Dist. of Cal.,
872 F. 2d 310, 312 (CA9 1989) (§§ 9 and 10 mandatory); United
States ex rel. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Ets-Hokin Corp.,
397 F. 2d 935, 939 (CA9 1968) (§ 10 mandatory). We reverse.

II

Section 9 of the FAA governs venue for the conﬁrmation

of arbitration awards:

“If the parties in their agreement have agreed that a
judgment of the court shall be entered upon the award
made pursuant to the arbitration, and shall specify the
court, then at any time within one year after the award
is made any party to the arbitration may apply to the
court so speciﬁed for an order conﬁrming the award, and
thereupon the court must grant such an order unless the
award is vacated, modiﬁed, or corrected as prescribed in
sections 10 and 11 of this title.
If no court is speciﬁed
in the agreement of the parties, then such application
may be made to the United States court in and for the
district within which such award was made.” 9 U. S. C.
§ 9.

Section 10(a), governing motions to vacate arbitration
awards, provides that

“the United States court in and for the district wherein
the [arbitration] award was made may make an order
vacating the award upon the application of any party to
the arbitration [in any of ﬁve enumerated situations].”

And under § 11, on modiﬁcation or correction,

“the United States court in and for the district wherein
the award was made may make an order modifying or