What are the defining characteristics of an arbitration agreement? The dissent in a new 9th Circuit case took on that vexing issue, while the majority sidestepped it altogether while refusing to compel arbitration.
In Boardman v. Pacific Seafood Group, __ F.3d __, 2016 WL 1743350 (9th Cir. May 3, 2016), a group of fishermen brought antitrust claims against seafood processors in 2010. They settled in 2012, and Paragraph 3(a) of the settlement agreement provided:
In the event that [] Pacific Seafood and Ocean Gold intend to enter into any new agreement that requires Pacific Seafood Group to act as the exclusive marketer of any seafood product produced by Ocean Gold Seafoods, [defendants] shall first give 60 days’ notice to class counsel and…an opportunity to object to the agreement. In the event of an objection to the new contractual arrangement, Judge Hogan shall determine whether the proposed new agreement…may be approved.
