The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in
Badgerow v. Walters, No. 20-1143 on May 17, 2021. The question presented is “[w]hether federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under Sections 9 and 10 of the [Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”)] where the only basis for jurisdiction is that the underlying dispute involved a federal question.”
In
Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49 (2009), the Supreme Court held that a federal court, in reviewing a petition to compel arbitration under Section 4 of the FAA, may “look through” the petition to decide whether the parties’ underlying dispute gives rise to federal question jurisdiction. Alan Kaplinsky and Martin Bryce of Ballard’s Consumer Financial Services group successfully represented the defendant in the District Court and the Fourth Circuit with respect to that issue. The text of Section 4, which states that petitions to compel arbitration may be brought before “any United States district court which, save for such agreement, would have jurisdiction under title 28 . . . of the subject matter of a suit arising out of the controversy between the parties,” drove the Supreme Court’s holding in