Jock v. Sterling Jewelers Inc.

Jun 1, 2017
16-1731-cv
Versions:

Appearing for Appellant: Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Seyfarth Shaw LLP (David Bennet Ross, Lorie E. Almon, Daniel B. Klein, on the brief), New York, NY., Jeffrey S. Klein, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY.

Appearing for Appellees: Joseph M. Sellers, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC (Kalpana Kotagal, Shaylyn Cochran, on the brief), Washington, DC., Sam J. Smith, Loren B. Donnell, Burr & Smith LLP, St. Petersburg, FL., Thomas A. Warren, Tallahassee, FL.

SUMMARY ORDER

Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant Sterling Jewelers Inc. (“Sterling“) appeals the May 22, 2016 opinion and order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Rakoff, J.) holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Sterling‘s motion to vacate the arbitrator‘s Equal Pay Act Collective Action Conditional Certification Award and the arbitrator‘s Order Re Claimants’ Motion for Tolling of EPA Limitations Period. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review.

“Every federal appellate court has a special obligation to satisfy itself not only of its own jurisdiction, but also that of the lower courts in a cause under review, even [if] the parties are prepared to concede it.” Hapag-Lloyd Aktiengesellschaft v. U.S. Oil Trading LLC, 814 F.3d 146, 150 n.10 (2d Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). Section 16 of the Federal Arbitration Act provides that an appeal may be taken only in limited circumstances, including from “an order” “confirming or denying confirmation of an award or partial award.” 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(D). The district court‘s order from which Sterling appeals neither confirmed nor denied confirmation of an award or partial award, but instead held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider an interim decision of the arbitrator. See Accenture LLP v. Spreng, 647 F.3d 72, 77 (2d Cir. 2011) (explaining Section 16(a)(1)(D) confers jurisdiction only over appeals of arbitration awards that “finally and definitively dispose of a separate independent claim“).

Accordingly, the instant appeal hereby is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction.