Case Name: DEVON PARK BIOVENTURES, L.P. v. SEBASTIAN HOLDINGS, INC., Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-11-16
Citations: 401 F. App'x 647
Docket Number: Nos. 10-1093, 10-1297
Parties: DEVON PARK BIOVENTURES, L.P. v. SEBASTIAN HOLDINGS, INC., Appellant.
Judges: Before: McKEE, Chief Circuit Judge, SLOVITER and COWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 401
Pages: 647–648

Head Matter:
DEVON PARK BIOVENTURES, L.P. v. SEBASTIAN HOLDINGS, INC., Appellant.
Nos. 10-1093, 10-1297.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) Monday, Nov. 8, 2010.
Filed: Nov. 16, 2010.
Thomas E. Zemaitis, Esq., Pepper Hamilton, Philadelphia, PA, for Devon Park Bioventures, L.P.
Jeffrey A. Krawitz, Esq., Silverman, Bernheim & Vogel, Philadelphia, PA, Ira S. Zaroff, Esq., Richard M. Zarofff, Esq., Zaroff & Zaroff, Garden City, NY, for Appellant.
Before: McKEE, Chief Circuit Judge, SLOVITER and COWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
McKEE, Chief Judge.
Sebastian Holdings, Inc. appeals the district court's orders affirming the arbitration awards dated July 7, 2009 and August 26, 2009, denying Sebastian Holdings's cross-motion to vacate the arbitration awards, and granting the motion of Devon Park Bioventures, L.P. to Direct Entry of Judgment. We affirm.
Because we write primarily for the parties, we need not repeat the facts or procedural history of this case, which the district court has previously set forth. Order Granting Mot. To Confirm Arbitration Award, 1^4, Dec. 3, 2009. Sebastian Holdings argues that the district court erred in affirming the arbitration awards because the arbitrator's decision was unsupported by the plain language of the contract and because the arbitrator ignored that Benoit Jamar had no authority to act on behalf of Sebastian Holdings.
In his detailed order, Judge Diamond thoughtfully and thoroughly explained his reasons for affirming the arbitrator's decision. See Order Granting Mot. To Confirm Arbitration Award, 4-9, Dec. 3, 2009. The district court's Order sufficiently analyzes the relevant law and applies it to the facts of this case. We can add little to the judge's thoughtful analysis or conclusions.
Accordingly, we will affirm the district court's Orders substantially for the reasons set for in those Orders without further elaboration.