Pumphrey v. Triad Life Sciences, 24-60028

Samuel Pumphrey was employed as a sales director at Triad Life Sciences and later reported alleged illegal conduct by the CEO related to the federal anti-kickback statute.
Pumphrey was terminated soon after reporting this conduct, allegedly as part of a corporate restructuring following Triad's acquisition by Convatec.
Pumphrey sued for wrongful termination under Mississippi's "McArn claim," citing retaliation for reporting illegal acts.
Triad moved to dismiss the claim under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim, and later sought to compel arbitration based on an employment agreement arbitration clause.
The district court denied Triad’s motion to compel arbitration, concluding Triad waived that right by first filing a 12(b)(6) motion.
On interlocutory appeal, the Fifth Circuit reviewed whether Triad had waived its right to arbitration by engaging the judicial process.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Waiver of right to arbitration by moving to dismiss	Triad waived arbitration by seeking merits dismissal in court	Sought dismissal for insufficient pleadings, not adjudication on merits	Filing a Rule 12(b)(6) motion here did not waive arbitration
Substantial invocation of judicial process	Motion to dismiss amounted to substantial court involvement	Only sought threshold dismissal, not resolution on merits	Triad’s court actions did not substantially invoke judicial process
Merits vs. pleading-based 12(b)(6) motions	Arguments asserted futility, aiming for dismissal with prejudice	Challenges were aimed at pleading sufficiency, not claim futility or merits	The motion was not tantamount to seeking merits determination
Leave to amend after motion to dismiss	Triad’s language implied amendment would be futile	Statements on futility were rhetorical, not substantive legal argument	Routine and encouraged practice to allow amendment; no waiver

McArn v. Allied Bruce-Terminix Co., 626 So.2d 603 (Miss. 1993) (recognizes wrongful termination tort claim for reporting illegal acts)
Nicholas v. KBR, Inc., 565 F.3d 904 (5th Cir. 2009) (discusses waiver of the right to arbitrate)
Walker v. J.C. Bradford & Co., 938 F.2d 575 (5th Cir. 1991) (defines substantial invocation of judicial process for arbitration waiver)
Subway Equip. Leasing Corp. v. Forte, 169 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 1999) (addresses overt acts showing intent to litigate rather than arbitrate)
Tenneco Resins, Inc. v. Davy Int’l, AG, 770 F.2d 416 (5th Cir. 1985) (waiver of arbitration right depends on factual circumstances)
Flaherty & Crumrine Preferred Income Fund, Inc. v. TXU Corp., 565 F.3d 200 (5th Cir. 2009) (pleading fraud and heightened standards)