Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf
Page Number: 6.0

Cite as:  599 U. S. ____ (2023) 

3 

Opinion of the Court 

district court denies a party’s motion to compel arbitration,
that party may take an interlocutory appeal.  Section 16(a)
creates  a  rare  statutory  exception  to  the  usual  rule  that
parties may not appeal before final judgment.  See Mohawk 
Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U. S. 100, 108–109 (2009). 
Notably,  Congress  provided  for  immediate  interlocutory
appeals  of  orders  denying—but  not  of  orders  granting— 
motions to compel arbitration. 

The sole question before this Court is whether a district 
court  must  stay  its  proceedings  while  the  interlocutory
appeal on arbitrability is ongoing.  The answer is yes.

Section  16(a)  does  not  say  whether  the  district  court
proceedings must be stayed.  But Congress enacted §16(a)
against  a  clear  background  principle  prescribed  by  this
Court’s precedents:  An appeal, including an interlocutory
appeal, “divests the district court of its control over those
aspects  of  the  case  involved  in  the  appeal.”  Griggs  v. 
Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U. S. 56, 58 (1982). 
That  Griggs  principle  reflects  a  longstanding  tenet  of
American  procedure.  See  Hovey  v.  McDonald,  109  U. S. 
150, 157 (1883); see also Price v. Dunn, 587 U. S. ___, ___ 
(2019)  (THOMAS,  J.,  joined  by  ALITO  and  GORSUCH,  JJ., 
concurring in denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 7) (describing 
Griggs  principle  as  “well  settled”);  Marrese  v.  American 
Academy  of  Orthopaedic  Surgeons,  470  U. S.  373,  379 
(1985)  (“In  general,  filing  of  a  notice  of  appeal  confers
jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district
court  of  control  over  those  aspects  of  the  case  involved  in
the appeal”).

The  Griggs  principle  resolves  this  case.  Because  the 
question  on  appeal  is  whether  the  case  belongs  in 
arbitration or instead in the district court, the entire case 
is essentially “involved in the appeal.”  459 U. S., at 58.  As 
Judge  Easterbrook  cogently  explained,  when  a  party 
appeals  the  denial  of  a  motion  to  compel  arbitration,
whether “the litigation may go forward in the district court