Oto Analytics, LLC v. Benworth Capital Partners LLC

Background

Oto Analytics filed a petition on July 1, 2024, seeking confirmation of a June 26, 2024 arbitration award under 9 U.S.C. § 9. Benworth waived service on July 5, 2024. Benworth then filed an administrative motion asking the court to clarify that its response deadline was no earlier than September 3, 2024, based on a claimed 60-day period after waiver of service.

Oto Analytics argued that the petition to confirm the arbitration award was a motion, making the 14-day response period in Civil Local Rule 7-3 applicable.

Court’s analysis

The court stated that the Federal Arbitration Act treats an application to confirm an arbitration award as a motion rather than a complaint. But the court found that Oto Analytics had not filed or noticed the petition as a motion under Civil Local Rules 7-1 and 7-2. The court relied on the principle that an improperly filed and noticed petition does not impose response obligations on the opposing party beyond opening the case file.

Oto Analytics later filed a notice of hearing on August 12, 2024, but the court concluded that it still had not filed and noticed a motion in the manner required by Civil Local Rule 7-2.

Ruling

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin struck the notice of hearing and terminated Benworth’s administrative motion to clarify the deadline. The court stated that Benworth would have 14 days to respond to a motion properly filed and noticed under Civil Local Rule 7-3. The court also noted that motion hearings were then being set for January 2025 and reminded the parties that they could consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction, but that reminder did not alter the rulings on the notice or administrative motion.