{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff41\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}
{\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols{\*\falt Courier New};}{\f41\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020602080505020303}Baskerville Old Face;}{\f171\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}
{\f172\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f174\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f175\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f176\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}
{\f177\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f178\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f179\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;
\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;
\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;\red255\green255\blue255;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden 
Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}{
\s16\ql \fi-360\li1440\ri1080\nowidctlpar\faauto\ls1\outlinelevel0\rin1080\lin1440\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 Level 1;}{\s17\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 \styrsid3501209 header;}{\s18\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 
\sbasedon0 \snext18 \styrsid3501209 footer;}}{\*\listtable{\list\listtemplateid0{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'00.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc0
\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'01.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\'02\'02.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'03.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0
\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'04.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'05.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc4
\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'06.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\'02\'07.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat0\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'00;}{\levelnumbers;}}{\listname AutoList1;}\listid1}}{\*\listoverridetable{\listoverride\listid1
\listoverridecount8{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat2\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'00.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat
\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'01.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4
\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'02.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0
\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'03.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'04.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}
{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'05.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat
{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'06.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}{\lfolevel\listoverridestartat\listoverrideformat{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0
\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\'02\'07.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}}}\ls1}}{\*\revtbl {Unknown;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid2442255\rsid3501209\rsid9508377\rsid12613751\rsid16341234}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info
{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min5}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy10\hr9\min58}{\version4}{\edmins5}{\nofpages30}{\nofwords12258}{\nofchars69875}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}
{\nofcharsws81970}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440\margb1170 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120
\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot12613751 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12613751 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12613751 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12613751 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12613751 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1170\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid12613751\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \fi-4320\li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Government of Guam v. PacifiCare}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , Opinion\tab \tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid12613751 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {
\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid16341234 30}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  of 45
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-28\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid16341234 
{\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom28\shpfhdr1\shpbxpage\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplockanchor\shplid2049{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}}
{\sp{\sn fillColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fillBackColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}}
{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxpage\dobypara\dodhgt0\dprect\dpx1440\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize28\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\insrsid12613751 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid12613751 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 GOVERNMENT OF GUAM AND EDNA T. PAULINO,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par Plaintiffs-Appellees,
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 v.}{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 PACIFICARE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 OF}{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  MICRONESIA, INC., 
\par dba PACIFICARE ASIA PACIFIC,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par Defendant-Appellant.}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 OPINION}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Filed: September 14, 2004}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Cite as: 2004 Guam 17}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Supreme Court Case No.: CVA04-006
\par Superior Court Case No.: CV1426-03}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par 
\par }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
\par Argued and submitted on July 16, 2004
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph134\trleft-134\trftsWidth1\trpaddl134\trpaddr134\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil 
\cellx4546\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9226\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid16341234 {
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\ul\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Appearing for Defendant-Appellant:}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par Randall Todd Thompson, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Esq}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .
\par Mair, Mair Spade & Thompson
\par A Professional Corp.
\par 238 A.F.C. Flores St.
\par Ste. 801 Pacific News Bldg.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\ul\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Appearing for Plaintiffs-Appellees:}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par David J. Highsmith, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Esq.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab \tab 
\par Special Asst. Atty. Gen.
\par The Law Office of David J. Highsmith, P.C. 
\par 194 Hernan Cortes Ave.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow 
\ts11\trqc\trgaph134\trleft-134\trftsWidth1\trpaddl134\trpaddr134\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4546\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone 
\clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9226\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 BEFORE: F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Chief Justice; ROBERT J. TORRES, JR., Associate Justice; PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR., Justice }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Pro Tempore}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{
\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 CARBULLIDO, C.J.:}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [1]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab This appeal concerns the 2003 Group Health Insurance Agreement/Health Services Agreement (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Agreement}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) executed by the Government of Guam (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Government}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) and PacifiCare Health Insurance Company of Micronesia, Inc., dba PacifiCare Asia Pacific (}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ), for group health insurance coverage for Government of Guam employees, retirees and dependents.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
A dispute arose between the parties regarding coverage under the Agreement for Fiscal Year 2004 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 FY 2004"), and PacifiCare submitted the dispute to arbitration as required under the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The three-member arbitration panel issued a unanimous award releasing PacifiCare from any further obligation to provide coverage under the Agreement for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Upon motion of the Government, the lower court vacated the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The lower court found that the arbitrators exceeded their authority in relieving PacifiCare from any further obligations under the Agreement, and further found that the arbitration award was made in disregar
d of the law and did not draw its essence from the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 PacifiCare appeals the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision vacating the arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 For the reasons stated herein, we reverse.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 I.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [2]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In November of 2002, PacifiCare and the Government executed a 2003 Group Health Insurance Agreement/Health Services Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Agreement was a contract for group health insurance for Government of Guam employees, retirees and dependents for Fiscal Year 2003.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Agre
ement contained an automatic annual renewal provision and general procedures for setting annual rates.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The Agreement also provided that disputes arising under the Agreement were to be submitted to arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [3]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab During the summer of 2003, the parties engaged in negotiations concerning rates and benefits to be applied to their Agreement for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 As a result of these negotiations, on August 26, 2003, PacifiCare served a }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Notice of Impasse and Demand for Arbitration}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  (}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Demand}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) upon the Government. The Demand contained four specific enumerated statements of dispute, as follows:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1080\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin1080\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-360\li1440\ri1080\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin1080\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 a.\tab 
PacifiCare maintains that the Agreement does not permit Defendant to proceed with open enrollment for Fiscal Year 2004 by permitting Government of Guam employees and retirees to select PacifiCare at Fiscal Year 2003 rates and benefits;
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\s16 \insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \hich\af0\dbch\af0\loch\f0 b.\tab}}\pard\plain \s16\qj \fi-360\li1440\ri1080\nowidctlpar
\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\jclisttab\tx1440\faauto\ls1\outlinelevel0\rin1080\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
PacifiCare maintains that under federal law and the Agreement, it is merely required to offer renewal of coverage for Fiscal Year 2004 at rates and benefits that PacifiCare deems appropriate. PacifiCare further maintains that it has fulfilled this obligat
ion by making several offers of renewal and that PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s last offer has been expressly rejected by Defendant. As a consequence, PacifiCare has no further obligation to provide any medical or dental coverage for Government of Guam employees and retirees for Fiscal Year 2004; or,
\par }\pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-360\li1440\ri1080\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin1080\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 c.\tab 
In the alternative, if PacifiCare is required to provide any medical or dental coverage to the Government of Guam for Fiscal Year 2004, and PacifiCare does not have the right under
 federal law or the Agreement to determine the appropriate rates and benefits, then PacifiCare maintains that such rates and benefits must be decided by mutual agreement or binding arbitration; or,
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-360\li1440\ri1080\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin1080\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 d.\tab In the alternative, if PacifiCare is required to provi
de any medical or dental services to Government of Guam for Fiscal Year 2004, and the rates and benefits are different than those provided in Fiscal Year 2003, then PacifiCare maintains that the new rates and benefits for Fiscal Year 2004 should be effect
ive as of October 1, 2003.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Appellant}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s Excerpts of Record (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ), vol. I of II, p. 146 (Demand, August 26, 2003).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [4]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Prior to arbitration, on September 17, 2003, the Government initiated the underlying case in the Superior Court seeking injunctive relief.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In its complaint, the Government sought a temporary restraining order restraining PacifiCare from publishing any further a
dvertisements notifying Government of Guam employees and retirees of its intention to discontinue coverage as of September 30, 2003, and to retract statements to that effect. The Government also sought a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Paci
fiCare to continue health insurance coverage pending the outcome of the arbitration proceedings.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [5]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab On September 19, 2003, the Superior Court granted the Government preliminary injunctive relief requiring PacifiCare to continue providing ins
urance coverage to Government of Guam subscribers until further notice of the court.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [6]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab On September 30, 2003, a one-day arbitration hearing was conducted pursuant to PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s prior Demand.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The parties offered testimony and other evidence.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The arbitrators issued a written arbitration award on October 1, 2003.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The award provided:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Pursuant to 1.01.21 of the Arbitration Agreement, the award is hereby rendered.
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 1.\tab 
PacifiCare made offers for renewal of medical coverage for fiscal year 2004 at rates and benefits that PacifiCare deemed appropriate. The Government of Guam did not accept said offers. Under the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountab
ility Act, 42 U.S.C. 300gg12(a), PacifiCare met its obligations and is under no further obligation to negotiate or to provide any medical health insurance plan to the Government of Guam for fiscal year 2004.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 2.\tab PacifiCare is also relieved of any obligation to renew its contract with the Government under the }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 continuing clause}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  in its Agreement with the Government of Guam.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\ul\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Government of Guam v.FHP, Inc., et al,.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Civ. Nos. CV0809-89, CV0755-89, CV1200-89 and CV1250-89 (Super. Ct. Guam), on Appeal Civ. Nos. 90-00014A, 90-000206A, 90-00040A (D. Guam. App. Div. 1991).
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par Appellant}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s Excerpts of Record (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ), vol. II of II, p. 393 (Arbitration Award).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [7]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab PacifiCare filed a motion in the Superior Court to confirm the award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The Government thereafter moved to vacate the award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [8]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab On October 20, 2003 the lower court issued a }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Disision Yan Otden}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  (}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Decision and Order}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) vacating the October 1, 2003 arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The court fou
nd that by relieving PacifiCare from any further obligations under the Agreement, the arbitrators exceeded their authority, and further found that the award was made in disregard of the law and failed to draw its essence from the Agreement.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The court remanded the matter to the arbitrators to decide appropriate medical benefits and rates between PacifiCare and the Government for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 On November 5, 2003, PacifiCare moved for reconsideration of the court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s order.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [9]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab On remand, on October 30, 2003, the arbitrators issued a second award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The October 30, 2003 award set rates and benefits for coverage year FY 2004.}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 The rates were set as follows, subject to a $750 deductible: (1) Medical - $913.70/month for Clas
s I, $2732.34/month for Classes II and III; (2) Dental - $39.42/month for Class I, $105.77/month for Classes II and III. Apparently twelve individuals opted for PacifiCare coverage at these rates.}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 PacifiCare thereafter moved to confirm and enforce the October 30, 2003 award, reserving its right to appeal the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s October 20, 2003 Decision and Order and to seek damages against the Government for breach of contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 On October 31, 2003, the Superior Court confirmed the October 30, 2003 award in a bench ruling.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The parties thereafter proceeded with open enrollment for FY 2004 based upon the rates and benefits set forth in the award issued on remand.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [10]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab PacifiCare thereafter commenced the instant appeal, and moved to expedite the appeal. The Government opposed the motion to expedite and moved to dismiss the appeal.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This court denied the Government}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s motion to dismiss and granted PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s request that the appeal be expedited.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Government did not file a cross-appeal.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 II.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [11]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The Federal Arbitration Act (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 FAA}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
) applies to arbitration agreements in contracts involving }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 commerce in the Territories.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  1 (West, WESTLAW through P.L. 108-279) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 C]ommerce,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  as herein defined, means commerce among the several states 
. . . or in any territory of the United States . . . or between any such Territory and another, or between any such Territory and any State or foreign nation . . . .}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This phrase has been interpreted as encompassing commerce in Guam.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Kanazawa, Ltd. v. Sound, Unlimited}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 440 F.2d 1239, 1240 (9th Cir. 1971) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The question presented is whether commerce in Guam is commerce }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 in any Territory of the United States}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 as the phrase is used in 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  1.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We think it is.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Contracts concerning insurance constitute }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 commerce}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  within the scope of the FAA.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
See Utica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gulf Ins. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 762 N.Y.S.2d 730, 732 (App. Div. 2003) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Because insurance transactions constitute commerce within the meaning of the Commerce Clause (}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Assn.,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  322 U.S. 533, 553, 64 S. Ct. 1162, 88 L. Ed. 1440, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 reh. denied}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  323 U.S. 811, 65 S. Ct. 26), it
 is beyond dispute that the Agreement at issue is a contract involving interstate and, indeed, international commerce.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Mason v. Acceptance Loan Co., Inc}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 850 So.2d 289, 294 (Ala. 2002) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Regarding the application of the FAA in the insurance context, we have held: }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Unquestionably, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 insurance transactions that stretch across state lines}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 or intrastate insurance transactions that otherwise have the requisite (substantial) effect on interstate commerce constitute }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Commerce among the several States,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  so a
s to make them subject to regulation by Congress under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Southern United Fire Ins. Co. v. Knight,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  736 So. 2d 582, 586 (Ala. 1999) (citing }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  322 U.S. 533, 546-47, 64 S. Ct. 1162 (1944) (}
{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 holding that an insurer that conducts business across state lines is engaged in 
interstate commerce}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 )); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Sotka v. Thrivent Fin. for Lutherans}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 2004 WL 1405741, *1 (Wash. Super. 2004) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [T]he FAA is applicable in this case, because plaintiff's insurance contract with Thrivent involves interstate commerce.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [12]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Accordingly, the FAA applies to the present dispute.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Erickson v. Aetna Health Plan of Cal.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 76, (Ct. App. 1999) (finding that a
 breach of a health insurance claim under a contract wherein Aetna would provide replacement Medicare coverage was governed by the FAA because, among other factors, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Aetna, in performing its Medicare contract, enters into interstate contracts with vendors and service providers operating on a national basis}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [13]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab This court has jurisdiction over the present appeal pursuant to sections 9(a)(1)(D) and (a)(1)(E) of the FAA, which provide:}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (a)\tab An appeal may be taken from}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 67 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (1)\tab an order}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 67 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . . . 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi540\li1260\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin1260\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (D) confirming or denying confirmation of an award or partial award, or
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi540\li1260\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin1260\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (E) modifying, correcting, or vacating an award;
\par }\pard \qj \fi1800\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  16(a)(1)(D)-(E).}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn 
{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid12613751 2}{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 In its Appellee}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s Brief, the Government raised the defense of sovereign immunity.  The Government thereafter conceded the issue during oral argument.  Notwithstanding the Government}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s abandonment of the issue, we nonetheless fin
d the sovereign immunity argument unpersuasive.  By entering into an agreement referring disputes to arbitration, the Government is bound by the provisions of such agreement as any other party would, and claim of sovereign immunity is unavailing to preven
t enforcement of the agreement.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Hardie v. United States}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 367 F.3d 1288, 1291 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [T]he arbitration clause was part and parcel of the joint venture agreement, and }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [a]rbitration agreements are properly viewed as contractual arrangements for resolving disputes.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  Consequently, the United States is subject to the arbitration clause of the joint venture agreement just as any private party would be.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ).  This is especially so because the Government not only instituted the underlying action, but sought a temporary restraining order prohibiting PacifiCare from discontinuing c
overage to Government of Guam employees prior to the resolution of the dispute by the arbitrators.  The Government essentially sought performance of the Agreement }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 pending arbitration}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
.  We are guided by the reasoning articulated by the Fourth Circuit in }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 United States v. Bankers Ins. Co.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 245 F.3d 315, 320 (4th Cir. 2001).  The court stated: 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 Put simply, the doctrine of sovereign immunity is not in any way implicated or threatened by the Government}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s compliance with
 its contract obligations. When the Government chooses to seek damages in a civil action, it--like all parties--should abide by the law, including an arbitration process to which it is contractually bound.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Id.  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 Here, the Government itself argued before the
 lower court that the parties should await the outcome of the arbitration.  Considering this, it would be }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
grossly inequitable}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  for the Government to use sovereign immunity as a sword to negate the arbitration agreement itself.  }{
\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Ruppenthal v. State, By and Through Econ. Dev. & Stabilization Bd.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 849 P.2d 1316, 1321 (Wyo. 1993) (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 To permit [a recoupment defense] would seem to be
 no more than simple justice; to deny it the right would be grossly inequitable.  No one would assert that in an action by the sovereign, valid legal defenses should be denied the defendant.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ) (alteration in original).  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
To allow a state to enter into a contract and then deny the other contracting party a remedy under the contract would be to }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 ascribe bad faith and shoddy dealing to the sovereign.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 State v. Sorensen}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 436 N.W.2d 358, 364 (Iowa 1989).}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [14]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab We review a lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s order vacating an arbitration award }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Teamsters Local Union 58 v. Boc Gases}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 249 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 2001); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Brook v. Peak Int}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 l, Ltd}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 294 F.3d 668, 672 (5th Cir. 2002).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 standard is }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 intended to reinforce the strong deference due an arbitrative tribunal.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Brook}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 294 F.3d at 672 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 McIlroy v. PaineWebber, Inc.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 989 F.2d 817, 820 (5th Cir.1993)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s legal rulings in vacating an arbitration award are reviewed }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , while factual findings are reviewed for clear error.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Sumitomo Constr. Co. v. Zhong Ye, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  9.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 III.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [15]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab PacifiCare argues that the lower court erred in vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  October 1, 2003 award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
In its award, the arbitrators decided that PacifiCare was no longer obligated, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 HIPAA}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 )}{
\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }
{\fs20\insrsid12613751 HIPAA was signed into law on August 21, 1996.  Health Ins. Portability and Accountability Act}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 , }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 P.L. No. 104-191, H.R. 3103, 104th Congress (1996).  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 HIPAA imposes new federal
 law requirements on health insurers (including indemnity carriers, HMOs, and BC/BS organizations) that issue health insurance coverage in either the large group market, the small group market, or both, regarding the issuance and renewal of group health i
nsurance.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751   JEFFREY D. MAMORSKY, HEALTH CARE BENEFITS LAW }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  16.03 (2004), found at WESTLAW, HCBL, }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  16.03.  
}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
The Act is primarily designed to make it easier for those who remain continuously covered under employer-sponsored plans to change jobs without having to satisfy new eligibility requirements,}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  and contains provisions for }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
guaranteed issue and guaranteed renewability.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751   Phyllis C. Borzi, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 
Health Care Legislation: Implementing HIPAA, The Newborns}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751  and Mothers}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751  Protection Act, the Mental Health Parity Act, and the Women}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 s Health and Cancer Rights Act}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
, in American Law Institute-American Bar Association Continuing Legal Education, March 30, 2000, Health Plans, HIPAA, and Cobra Update Current ERISA Tax, and Other Issues for Attorneys, Administrators, Insurers, and Consultants, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 
available at}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  WESTLAW, VLR993 ALI-ABA 53, 55. }}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  or the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 continuing clause}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  of the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement,}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 The so-called continuing clause, Paragraph 2.1 o
f the Agreement, provided:}{\fs20\ul\insrsid12613751 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\fs20\ul\insrsid12613751 Term}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 .  This contract, in its original form, became effective August 1, 1973.  It shall renew automatically for one year each October 1}{
\fs20\super\insrsid12613751 st}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  unless terminated for major default in availability or quality of services, given by written
 notice from the Government of Guam to PacifiCare not less than ninety (90) calendar days before the renewal date, or unless modified by mutual agreement.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751  Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s Excerpts of Record, pp. 172-73, vol. II of II (Agreement, }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  2.1). }}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 to renew its contract with the Government for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The lower court vacated the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision in its October 20, 2003 Decision and Order on three primary grounds: (1) the award exhibited a manifest disregard of the law; (2) the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 decision did not comport with the essence of the Agreement, namely, the continuing clause; and (3) the arbitrators exceeded their authority by determining to terminate the agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the lower court erred on all three grounds. 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 A.}{\b\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Standards and Grounds for Vacating an Arbitration Award}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [16]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
In light of the strong federal policy favoring arbitration, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[j]udicial review of an arbitration award is extraordinarily narrow.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Brook}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 294 F.3d at 672 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Gulf Coast Indus. Worker's Union v. Exxon Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  70 F.3d 847, 850 (5th Cir.1995) (alteration in original)); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see Roubik v. Merill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 692 N.E.2d 1167, 1171 (Ill. 1998) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
It is well established that judicial review of an arbitral award is intended to be more limited than appellate review of a trial court judgment.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo Construction Co. v. Zhong Ye, Inc.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8, this court stated that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[w]hen reviewing the decision of a lower court confirming an arbitration award, questions of law are reviewed de novo while questions of fact are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  9 (citing First Option of Chicago, Inc., v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938 (1995)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 court further held that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [t]hese same standards apply to the trial court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s review of the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s award.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
. (citing Carpenters Pension Trust v. Underground Construction Co., 31 F.3d 776 (9th Cir. 1994)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
This latter pronouncement relates to the question of the standards applicable to the lower court in reviewing the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We do not interpret this pronouncement in }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 as indicating that arbitration awards may be reviewed freely under the }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and clearly erroneous standards without regard to the well-established policy
 considerations favoring arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Automated Tracking Sys., Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 719 N.E.2d 1036, 1041 n.2 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998).}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 With regard to the standards applicable in determining whether to vacate an arbitration award, the }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  cou
rt further clarified:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
In arbitration cases decided under the [FAA] . . . the scope of review is quite narrow. This is complementary to a policy favoring consensual agreements and guaranteeing enforcement of contractual terms between the parties. }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 473 U.S. 614 (1985). Although a serious question may arise as to the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s view of the law, an award }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 will not be set aside by a court for error either in law or fact ... if the award contains the honest decision of the arbitrators, after a full and fair hearing of the parties.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Coast Trading Co., Inc. v. Pacific Molasses Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 681 F.2d 1195, 1198 (9th Cir. 1982) (citations omitted). In other words, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
as long as the arbitrator is even arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority, a court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s conviction that the arbitrator made a serious mistake or committed grievous error will not furnish a satisfactory basis for undoing the decision.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Advest, Inc. v. McCarthy}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 914 F.2d 6, 9 (1st Cir. 1990) (citations omitted).

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1260\tx1440\tx1620\tx1800\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, while as a general matter legal determinations are reviewed }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 and factual determinations are reviewed for clear error, an application of these general standards of review does not support vacating an arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision absent the recognized narrow circumstances warranting vacatur.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
See Automated Tracking Sys., Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 719 N.E.2d at 1041 n.2 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 While we will review the trial court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s order vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , . . . we decline to review the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 award itself }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Local Joint Executive Bd. of Las Vegas v. Riverboat Casino, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 817 F.2d 524, 526 (9th Cir. 1987) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This court reviews }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 the district courts grant of summary judgment confirming the arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The district court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s review of the arbitral award is, however, limited.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (citation omitted).}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [17]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Section 10 of the FAA enumerates the grounds wherein a court may vacate an arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
It provides:}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (a)}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In any of t
he following cases the United States court in and for the district wherein the award was made may make an order vacating the award upon the application of any party to the arbitration}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (1)}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means;
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (2)}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 where there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators, or either of them;
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (3)}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone th
e hearing, upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy;}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
or of any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced;}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 or
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 (4)}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or 
so imperfectly executed them that a mutual, final, and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made. . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10 (West, WESTLAW through P.L. 108-279).}{
\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 In its October 20, 2003 Decision, the lower court relied upon Guam}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s Civil Arbitration Law, including section 42108 of Title 7 of the GCA, in determining whether to vacate the arbitrators}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 award.  The lower court did not cite or rely upon section 10(a) of the FAA.  Section 42108 of Title 7 of the GCA, Guam}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s Civil Arbitration Law, which governed the standard for vacating an arbitration award at the time of the lower court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s October 20, 2003 Decision, mirrors exactly section 10 of the FAA.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 Title 7 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751  42108 (1993).  This court has recognized, in }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Sumitomo}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , that section 42108 was patterned after the United States Arbitration Act, which is the predecessor statute of the FAA.  }{
\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ,}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 1997 Guam 8 at }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751  5 (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 A review of the legislative drafts concerning Guam}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s arbitration statutes indicates that they were patterned after the United States Arbitration Act found in Title 9 of the United States Code Annotated, }{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 1-14 (1970) . . .  .  In particular, the Guam provisions addressing vacation of arbitration awards mirror exactly the corresponding federal statutes.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ).  In }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Sumitomo}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , we further found that because the Legislature modeled our statute after the federal statute, }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [w]e can properly assume that the legislature meant to adopt the federal construction of Guam}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s arbitration statutes . . . .}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751   }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Id}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 . at }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  8.  
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 Our statute was patterned after section 10 of the FAA, therefore, federal cases interpreting the FAA are persuasive on this court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s construction of section 42108.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Id}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
.  The FAA applies in the present dispute.  Because we interpret the local statute, section 42108 of Title 7 of the GCA, in the same a manner as our interpretation of section 10 of the FAA, the lower court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s decision made pursuant to section 42108 will be reviewed as having been made pursuant to section 10 of the FAA.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See Volt Info.
 Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. Univ.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 489 U.S. 468, 477, 109 S. Ct. 1248, 1255 (1989) (recognizing it prior holding that the substantive provisions of the FAA apply in both state and federal courts); }{
\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Dakota Wesleyan Univ. v. HPG Int}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 l, Inc.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
, 560 N.W.2d 921, 922 (S.D. 1997) (holding that the FAA }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
preempts state law and governs all written arbitration agreements in contracts involving interstate commerce.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ); }{
\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 83 Cal. App.3d 430, 436, 147 Cal. Rptr. 835, 838 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978) (applying federal law after }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [r]ecognizing California}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s arbitration statutes (Code Civ.Proc., s 1280 et seq.), }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 especially those governing the scope of judicial review of an arbitrator's award and the grounds for vacation of an award}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  (Code Civ.Proc
., s 1286.2), have }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 considerable substantive as well as procedural significance}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ) (emphasis 
added).  We thus rely on authority interpreting and applying section 10 of the FAA in reviewing whether the lower court correctly vacated the arbitrators}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  award.  }}}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [18]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In addition to the grounds set forth in the FAA, there exist several judicially-created grounds for vacating an award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  19 (recognizing that courts have vacated arbitration awards based on a }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 manifest disregard of the law}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  which is }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 not statutory but rather a judicially recognized federal exception introduced by the Un
ited States Supreme Court in }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Wilko v. Swan}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 346 U.S. 427, 436-37, 74 S. Ct. 182, 98 L. Ed. 168 (1953), }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 overruled on other grounds by}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 490 U.S. 477, 109 S. Ct. 1917, 104 L. Ed. 2d 526 (1989)}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sheldon v. Vermonty}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 269 F.3d 1202, 1206 (10th Cir. 2001) (stating that in addition to the circumstances enumerated under section 10 of the FAA, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [w]e have also recognized }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 a handful of judicially created reasons}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 that a district may rely upon to vacate an arbitration award . . . .}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
 }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The commonly recognized non-statutory grounds include }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [1] a }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 manifest disregard}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  of the law by the arbitrator, [2] a conflict between th
e award and a clear and well established }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 public policy,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  [3] an award that is }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 arbitrary and capricious}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  or }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 completely irrational,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and [4] a failure of the award to }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 draw its essence}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  from the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  contract.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Stephen L. Hayford, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Law in Disarray:}{\i\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Judicial Standards for Vacatur of Commercial Arbitration Awards}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 30 GA}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . L. R}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 EV}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . 731, 739 (Spring 1996) (describing the aforementioned as the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 primary . . . nonstatutory grounds}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
) (footnotes omitted); s}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ee also Sheldon}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 269 F.3d at 1206 (stating that some recognized exceptions that a district court may rely upon }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 include violations of public policy, manifest disregard of the law, and denial of a fundamentally fair hearing.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Greenberg v. Bear, Stearns & Co}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 220 F.3d 22, 27 (2d Cir. 2000) (recognizing that in addition to the grounds set forth in section 10(a) of the FAA, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 judicial interpretation has added 
additional grounds, such that awards may be vacated under limited circumstances where the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law or where enforcement would violate a }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 well defined and dominant public policy}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (citation omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [19]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Federal courts have not ruled consistently on whether an arbitration award may be vacated for reasons other than those set forth under section 10 of the FAA.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Hayford, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 supra}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , at 746 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 There is substantial disagre
ement among the United States circuit courts of appeals as to whether the statutory grounds for vacatur set out in Section 10(a) of the FAA should be augmented by judicially fashioned standards for review.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 )}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 Th
e author summarized the state of the law on this issue as follows:
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 
\par Only the Fourth Circuit has unequivocally rejected the nonstatutory grounds for vacatur.  
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 . . .   
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 Four circuit courts of appeals can be described as being in a state of extreme confusion
 with regard to the non-statutory grounds for vacatur:  the Sixth, Ninth, Fifth, and Seventh.  The case law in each of those four circuits contains one or more unequivocal assertions that the exclusive grounds for vacatur of commercial arbitration awards 
are those set forth in section 10(a) of the FAA, juxtaposed with one or more opinions recognizing and applying a non-statutory ground for vacatur.  
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 . . .  
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 [T]he remaining federal circuit courts of appeals--the First, Second, Third, Eighth, Tenth, Eleventh
, and District of Columbia Circuits--have clearly recognized one or more of the nonstatutory grounds for vacatur of commercial arbitration awards, without having embraced in another opinion (earlier or later) the }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 exclusivity}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 view of Section 10(a) of the FAA.  Thus, they can be placed in the }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 nonstatutory grounds}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  category. 
\par  
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 Hayford, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 supra}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , at 764-65, 774 (footnotes omitted).}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ; }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also George Watts & Son, Inc. v. Tiffany and Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 248 F.3d 577, 579-580 (7th Cir. 2001) (explaining that the law in the Seventh Circuit and}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 in other circuits is similarly confused}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  in whether the manifest disregard of the law standard is an independent reason to set aside an arbitration award).}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This court has never squarely decided whether the grounds set forth in section 10 are the exclusive grounds for vacating an arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Cf. Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  20 (leaving open the question of whether the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
manifest disregard for the law}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 applied as an exception to the grounds set forth in the Commercial Arbitration Law, Section 42107 of Title 7 of the GCA, and finding that while legal authority existed to enable the court to adopt the exception in this jurisdiction, }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
at this time we are not presented with the proper justification necessitating our adoption and use of the manifest disregard exception.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [20]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The lower court relied upon both statutory and non-statutory grounds in vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We therefore review the court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s reliance on both categories of grounds.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
A discussion of all three specific grounds relied upon by the lower court is presented below in relation to the }{\f0\insrsid16341234 relevant issues in this appeal.}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 B.}{\b\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Lower Court}{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s Decision
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 1.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Arbitrability of the termination issue}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [21]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In its October 20, 2003 Decision and Order, the lower court found that the arbitrators exceeded their authority by addressing the issue of termination.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, p. 426 (Decision and Order, October 20, 2003, p. 26).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The lower court cited Enclosure 9A of the administrative procedures governing the negotiations for FY 2004, which provided that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [a] request for arbitration shall be confined to those issues to which resolutions was earnestly sought at the negotiating table but was not reached.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, p. 417 (Decision and Order, p. 17, October 20, 2003) (quoting Enclosure 9A, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  I(4)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The court stated that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [b]ased upon Enclosure 9A, the arbitrators were bound to decide the only issue which resulted in an impasse, i.e., medical coverage.
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
ER, vol. II of II, p. 426 (Decision and Order, October 20, 2003, p. 26).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The court concluded that the arbitrators exceeded their authority by concluding that PacifiCare was no longer required to provide medical or dental coverage under its Agreement with the Government of Guam because the }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 award must be limited to issues which created an impasse and not others.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, p. 426 (Decision and Order, October 20, 2003, p. 26).
}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [22]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab By determining that the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  authority was limited by the procedural requirements of Enclosure 9A, the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision implicated the issue of arbitrability.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The lower court essentially determined that the issues of continued coverage or termination were not arbitrable.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [23]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Under section 10(a)(4) of the FAA, a lower court may vacate an arbitration award when the arbitrators exceed their authority.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10(a)(4).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 An arbitrator exceeds his authority when he }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
arbitrate[s] a dispute that is not arbitrable in the first place.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
State v. R.I. Alliance of Soc. Servs. Employees, Local 580, SEIU}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 747 A.2d 465, 468 (R.I. 2000).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [24]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
It is a long-standing principle of consensual arbitration that the nature and scope of an arbitration panel}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s authority is determined by the language of the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Lupone v. Lupone}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 848 A.2d 539, 541 (Conn. Ct. App. 2004); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Kiefer Specialty Flooring, Inc. v. Tarkett, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 174 F.3d 907, 909 (7th Cir. 1999) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Whether a particular issue is subject to arbitration is a matter of contract interpretation, because }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  363 U.S. 574, 582, 80 S. Ct. 1347 (1960)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, 
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [t]he contours of the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s powers are determined by reference to the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  agreement to arbitrate and their submission to arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
They are not ascertained by judicial determinations of the types and degrees of error (law, fact, or contract interpretation) that will be, or rightfully should be, tolerated without voiding the award.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Hayford, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 supra}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , at 825; }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 832 P.2d 899, 916 (Cal. 1992) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It is well settled that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
arbitrators do not exceed their powers merely because they assign an erroneous reason for their decision.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 A contrary holding would permit the exception to swallow the rule of limited judicial review; a litigant could always contend the arbitrator erred and thus exceeded his powers.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (citation omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [25]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The l
ower court reviewed the issue of arbitrability independently and determined that the arbitrators were not permitted under the Agreement to determine the issue of continued coverage.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
We find that the lower court erred in this regard.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In reviewing the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision, we are required to distinguish between issues reserved for determination by the courts and those reserved for the arbitrators. 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [26]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The United States Supreme Court has clarified, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [w]hen deciding whether the parties agreed to arbitrate a certain matter (including arbitrability), courts generally . . . should apply ordinary state-law principles that govern the formation of contracts.
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 514 U.S. 938, 944, 115 S. Ct. 1920, 1924 (1995).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 However, several presumptions apply when interpreting a contract containing an agreement to arbitrate.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
strong support for the federal policy favoring arbitration exists[,]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 the FAA }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 establishes that, as a matter of federal law, any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues should be resolved in favor of arbitration.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Kiefer Specialty Flooring, Inc}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 174 F.3d at 909 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp.,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  460 U.S. 1, 24-25, 103 S. Ct. 927 (1983)); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  14 (}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [A]ny doubt as to the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s jurisdiction is resolved in favor of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Stated another way, ambiguities regarding the question of }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 whether}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 a particular merits-related dispute is arbitrable because it is within the scope of a valid arbitration agreement}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  are construed in favor of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See First Options}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 514 U.S. at 944-45, 115 S. Ct. at 1924 (determining that before concluding that the parties intended that an issue not be arbitrated, the intent to exclude such issues from arbitration must be clear); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
see also United States}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 v. Bankers Ins. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . 245 F.3d 315, 319 (4th Cir. 2001) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[I]n applying common law principles of contract interpretation to the interpretation of an arbitration agreement within the scope of the FAA, due regard mu
st be given to the federal policy favoring arbitration, and ambiguities as to the scope of the arbitration clause itself resolved in favor of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (brackets omitted) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. Univ.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 489 U.S. 468, 475-76, 109 S. Ct. 1248 (1989)); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Executone Info. Sys., Inc. v. Davis}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 26 F.3d 1314, 1320-21 (5th Cir. 1994) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In deciding whether the arbitrator exceeded its authority, we resolve all doubts in favor of arbitration.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Roubik}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 692 N.E.2d at 1172 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [I]n reviewing an arbitrability question, courts are bound to apply th
e established federal policy favoring arbitration and to resolve any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues in favor of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 );}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Kiefer Specialty Flooring, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 174 F.3d at 909 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [A] court may not deny a party}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s request to arbitrate an issue }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
United States Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  363 U.S. 574, 582-83, 80 S. Ct. 1347 (1960)).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [27]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Second, on the question of }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 who }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 determines arbitrability, the law }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 reverses the presumption}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  favoring arbitrability.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 514 U.S. at 945, 115 S. Ct. at 1924.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The question of whether a claim or dispute is arbitrable is generally considered one for the courts, and not the arbitrators, unless the parties clearly and unmistakably reserved the question for the arbitrators.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See id.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  (explaining that in deciding }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 whether a party has agreed that arbitrators should decide arbitrability,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[c]ourts should not assume that the parties agreed to arbitrate arbitrability unless there is }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 clear and unmistakable}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  evidence that they did so.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (brackets omitted); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 537 U.S. 79, 83, 123 S. Ct. 588, 592 (2002).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Courts may conduct an independent determination of the question of arbitrability if the parties have not clearly agreed that the question of arbitrability is to be determined by the arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Roubik}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 692 N.E.2d at 1172 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Under the FAA and the case law interpreting it, the question of whether a claim is arbitrable is to be independently decided by the courts, unless the parties }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 clearly and unmistakably}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  agree to allow the arbitrator to decide arbitrability.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
) (alteration omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [28]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Any }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
potentially dispositive}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 inquiry related to whether a requirement for arbitration has been fulfilled could be considered, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 linguistically speaking,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  a }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 question of arbitrability}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  to the extent that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 its answer will determine whether arbitration will proceed on the merits.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Howsam}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 537 U.S. at 83, 123 S. Ct. at 592.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 However, the clear and unmistakable standard applies only to determining who decides certain questions of arbitrability, including }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 whether the parties are bound by a given arbitration clause,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
whether an arbitration clause in a concededly binding contract applies to a particular type of controversy.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 537 U.S. at 84, 123 S. Ct. at 592.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [29]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab By contrast, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 procedural}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  questions which grow out of the dispute and bear on its final disposition}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  are presumptively }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 not}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  for the judge, but for an arbitrator, to decide.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  (quoting }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley & Sons Inc. v. Livingston}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 376 U.S. 543, 557, 84 S. Ct. 909 (1964)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Citing comments to the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act, the Court in }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Howsam }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 recently clarified that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, issues of substantive arbitrability . . . are for a court to decide and issues of procedural arbitrability, }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 i.e.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , whether prerequisites such as time limits, notice, laches, estoppel, and other conditions precedent to an obligation to arbitrate have been met, ar
e for the arbitrators to decide.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . 537 U.S. at 85, 123 S. Ct. 588 at 592 (emphasis omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [30]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Thus, unlike questions of substantive arbitrability, which may be reviewed by courts independently absen
t a clear and unmistakable intent by the parties otherwise, courts apply a deferential standard to an arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision on issues related to procedural requirements for arbitrability.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Kennecott Utah Copper Corp. v. Becker}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 186 F.3d 1261, 1267-68 (10th Cir. 1999).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Specifically, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 if a party submits a question of procedural arbitrability to an arbitrator, a court will not later review the issue }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , but will i
nstead defer to the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s resolution in the same way it defers to his or her ruling on the merits.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . at 1267 (citing the holding of }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  that if the parties agreed to submit the arbitrability question to arbitration, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 then the court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s standard for reviewing the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s decision about that matter should not differ from the standard courts apply when they review any other matter that parties have agreed to arbitrate.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
This rule of deference is founded on the recognition that (1) procedural questions are often intertwined with the merits of the dispute and (2) the reservation of procedural issues for the courts provides an opportunity for
 serious delay and duplication of effort.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Stroh Container Co. v. Delphi Indust., Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 783 F.2d 743, 748-49 (8th Cir. 1986). 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [31]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The lower court here conducted an independent review of the whether the arbitrators could decide the question of termination, giving no deference to the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We review }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 de novo }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 whether the issue of arbitrability i
s for the court or for the arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Bell v. Cendant Corp.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 293 F.3d 563, 565-66 (2d Cir. 2002).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We find that the lower court erred in determining arbitrability independently of the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [32]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 376 U.S. 543, 84 S. Ct. 909 (1964), the Supreme Court faced the issue of whether the court or the arbitrator should decide the question of whether the dispute resolution requirements and procedures in the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  contract were met.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
John Wiley}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , two companies, John Wiley and Interstate, merged.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 544-45, 84 S. Ct. at 912.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Prior to the merger, many of Interstate}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s employees were members of a union and received the benefits of a collective bargaining agreement (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 CBA}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 A
 dispute arose between the union and John Wiley as to whether the collective bargaining agreement survived the merger.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley argued that it did not, while the union argued that the employees had vested rights under the CBA notwithstanding the merger.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Prior to the expiration of the agreement, the union commenced an action in court to compel arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The Supreme Court was presented with two issues: (1) who should decide whether the arbitration provisions in the CBA survived the merg
er; and (2) who should decide whether certain grievance procedures required prior to commencing arbitration have been met.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
., 376 U.S. at 544, 84 S. Ct. at 911.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Court held that the first question, which was related to whether the parties were }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
bound to arbitrate, as well as what issues it must arbitrate, is a matter to be determined by the Court on the basis of the contract entered into by the parties.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 376 U.S. at 547, 84 S. Ct. at 913.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
On the second issue, however, the Court found the opposite }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 that the arbitrators should decide the issue.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [33]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Specifically, in }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, the CBA enumerated a three-step process for determining disputes. Step 1 required a conference between the employee, union steward, and employer.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
., 376 U.S. at 555-56, 84 S. Ct. at 917.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Under Step 2, the grievance was to be submitted to an officer of the employer and a union shop committee, and/or a representative from the union.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 556, 84 S. Ct. at 917.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Under Step 3, the parties would arbitrate the dispute }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 in the event that the grievance 
should not be resolved or settled in Step 2.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 556, 84 S. Ct. at 917.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 On appeal, John Wiley argued that since the first two steps were not followed, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 it has no duty to arbitrate this dispute.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley further argued that }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 whether }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 procedural}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  conditions to arbitration have been met must be decided by the court and not the arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 556, 84 S. Ct. at 918.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that the issues regarding compliance with the grievance procedures were intertwined with the merits because the procedural prerequisites }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 develop in the context of an actual dispute about the [r]ights of the parties to the contract or those covered by it.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 556-57, 84 S. Ct. at 918.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Court explained:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Doubt whether grievance procedures or some part of them apply to a particular dispute, whether such procedures have b
een followed or excused, or whether the unexcused failure to follow them avoids the duty to arbitrate cannot ordinarily be answered without consideration of the merits of the dispute which is presented for arbitration. . . .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It would be a curious rule which required that intertwined issues of }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 substance}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 procedure}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  growing out of a single dispute and raising the same questions on the same facts had to be carved up between two different forums, one deciding after the other.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Neither logic nor considerations of policy compel such a result.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 557, 84 S. Ct. at 918.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Court held: }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Once it is determined, as we have, that the parties are obligated to submit the subject matter of a dispute to arbitration, }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 procedural}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  questions which grow out of the dispute and bear on its final disposition should be left to the arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 . 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [34]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In the case }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 sub judice,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 the lower court identified the subject matter of the dispute as involving PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s continued obligation to provide coverage for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement broadly provided: }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Any dispute or controversy}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  between the parties arising under this Agreement shall be submitted to binding arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Appellant}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s ER, vol. II of II, p. 217 (Agreement, Attachment III, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 1.01).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In light of this broad language, a dispute concerning whether PacifiCare could be released from its obligations was a subject matter which was arbitrable under the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Furthermore, there is nothing in the Agreement which excluded the issue of termination from resolution pursuant to the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [35]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Thus, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [o]nce it is determined, as we have, that the parties are obligated to submit the subject matter of a dispute to arbitration, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 procedural}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  questions which grow out of the dispute and bear on its final disposition should be left to the arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 376 U.S. at 557, 84 S. Ct. at 918.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [36]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Here, the lower court cited Enclosure 9A(I)(4) which provided that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [a] request for arbitration shall be confined to those issues to which resolutions was earnestly sought at the negotiating table but was not reached.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Supplemental Record on Appeal, (Decl. of David A. Mair, Ex. A).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The lower court apparently interpreted the language as a limitation to the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  powers, specifically, that the arbitrators were only authorized to decide issues which the parties were at an impasse.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The lower court}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision was grounded in its determination that the parties had not reached an impasse on
 the issue of termination.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Similar to }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 John Wiley}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, this question of whether the dispute resolution requirements and procedures were met was one for the arbitrators.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See John Wiley}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 376 U.S. at 557, 84 S. Ct. at 918 (holding that the arbitrators, and not the court, should decide the issue of whether the parties complied the grievance procedures which were prerequisites for arbitration).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Questions of whether the parties negotiated and reached an impasse on an issue submitted for decision by the arbitrators necessarily }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 develop in the context of an actual dispute about the [r]ights of the parties to the contract or those covered by it.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 376 U.S. at 556-57, 84 S. Ct. at 918.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [37]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab 
Furthermore, our characterization of the issue here as falling within the realm of procedural arbitrability is supported by the rationale for the respective presumptions applicable when interpreting an arbitration agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 As the Supreme Court has explained, the question of }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 whether}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  a merits-related dispute is arbitrable
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 arises when the parties have a contract that provides for arbitration of some issues.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In such circumstances, the parties likely gave at least some thought to the scope of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 And, given the law}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s permissive policies in respect to arbitration, one can understand why the law would insist upon clarity before concluding that the parties did }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 not}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  want to arbitra
te a related matter.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 On the other hand, the former question - the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 who (primarily) should decide arbitrability}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  question}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 is rather arcane.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
A party often might not focus upon that question or upon the significance of having arbitrators decide the scope of their own powers.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
And, given the principle that a party can be forced to arbitrate only those issues it specifically has agreed to submit to arbitration, one can understand why courts might hesitate to interpret silence or ambiguity on the }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 who should decide arbitrability}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  point as givi
ng the arbitrators that power, for doing so might too often force unwilling parties to arbitrate a matter they reasonably would have thought a judge, not an arbitrator, would decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 514 U.S. at 945, 115 S. Ct. at 1924-25 (citations omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, as the Court in }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 explained, where the question is who decides arbitrability, it is possible that the parties did not think the arbitrator would decide the question.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This is because by including an arbitration c
lause, the parties were likely only contemplating that the issues before the arbitrator would relate to the merits of the dispute brought }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 pursuant to the arbitration clause}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, and not whether a dispute fell within the clause to begin with.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Such reasoning is
 sensible where the precise question is who decides substantive questions of arbitrability, such as whether the subject matter of the dispute falls within the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
By contrast, here, the provisions identified by the lower court are the procedures of Enclosure 9A.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 By including a broad arbitration clause in the Agreement mandating arbitration of }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 any dispute or controversy arising under the Agreement,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and by making the requirements of Enclosure 9A part of the negotiation process under the Agreement, the parties would }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 likely expect that an arbitrator would decide the gateway matter}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  of whether the }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 otherwise arbitrable subject}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  could be addressed in light of the procedural requirements of Enclosure 9A.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Howsam}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 537 U.S. at 84, 123 S. Ct. at 592; }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 cf. Abram Landau Real Estate v. Benova}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 123 F.3d 69, 74 (2d Cir. 1997) (findin
g that the arbitrator, and not the courts, should determine whether arbitration was barred by the evergreen clause in the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  contract, and concluding that because the agreement }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
contained a broad arbitration clause submitting to arbitration }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 all}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  disputes between the parties }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 involving}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  the interpretation of any provision of the Agreement[, the] provision surely cover[ed] a dispute involving the validity of the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 evergreen clause}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and, therefore, is a proper subject for arbitration}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{
\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }
{\fs20\insrsid12613751 We note the cases of }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 HIM Portland, LLC v. Devito Builders, Inc.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 317 F.3d 41 (1st Cir. 2003), and }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 White v. Kampner}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
, 641 A.2d 1381 (Conn. 1994), but determine that they do not compel us to reach a contrary conclusion.  In }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 HIM}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ,}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
the First Circuit affirmed the district court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s decision denying a motion to compel arbitration where the parties did not first request mediation as required under the contract.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 HIM}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ,}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
317 F.3d at 44.  Notably, the }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 HIM }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 court did not address the issue of whether the court or the arbitrators shoul
d decide whether a condition precedent to arbitration was satisfied.  We thus do not find the case instructive.  In }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 White}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed the trial court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s decision that the mandatory negotiation clause in the parties}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  agreement was a condition precedent to arbitration, and that }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
this arbitrability issue was one for the courts to determine, not the arbitrators.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751   }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 White}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 , 641 A.2d at 1385.  We find }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 White}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  distinguishable because there, the parties}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  contract did not contain a broad and unlimited arbitration clause; rather, the arbitration provision in the parties}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  contract contained the qualification that negotiation be conducted as a condition of arbitrability.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See id}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 . at 1385 n.10.  Moreover, assuming the }{
\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 White}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  case is not limited to its facts, we are not otherwise persuaded by the court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 s holding to the extent that it conflicts with our reasoning set forth in the body of this opinion. }}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [38]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Thus, while it was within the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s province to review whether the arbitrators exceeded their authority, in conducting this review, the lower court should have given the appropriate deference to the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision on the issue regarding compliance with the procedural prerequisites for arbitration of a particular issue.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Major League Umpires Ass'n v. American League of Professional Baseball Clubs}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 357 F.3d 272, 279 (3d Cir. 2004).}{
\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 The requirem
ents set forth in Enclosure 9A regarding negotiation do not affect our decision that procedural arbitrability questions are for the arbitrators.  A reading of Enclosure 9A reveals that the procedures set forth therein are related solely to issues raised d
uring negotiations for coverage for FY 2004, and not other issues, such as questions of arbitrability, which may arise under the agreement.}{\insrsid12613751 
\par }}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [39]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab By releasing PacifiCare from any further obligation under the Agreeme
nt, the arbitrators presumably and implicitly found that the procedural requirements for determining the issue, including the requirement of an impasse, were met.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Given the deferential standard of review of the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 decisions, we cannot conclude that the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 decision to consider and decide the issue of termination contained a defect which would warrant setting that decision aside under any of the limited grounds for vacating an arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
In fact, there is evidence in the record which supports the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In its Demand, PacifiCare indicated that the parties were at an impasse as to medical rates, and requested that it be released from any further obligation under the Agreement.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In its arbitration brief, PacifiCare further elaborated that prior to arbitration, the parties discussed the issue of continued coverage for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 There is nothing in the record that would support overturning the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision under either section 10 of the FAA, or any judicially-recognized ground for vacating an arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Hill v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 814 F.2d 1192, 1195 (7th Cir. 1987) (stating that an arbitration award may only be set aside in the limited circumstances where the arbitrators }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 don}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
t interpret the contract}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  or if their decision }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 is infected by fraud or other corruption}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Accordingly, the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s contrary independent finding was in error.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [40]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The dissent argues that the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision under section 10(a)(4) should be affirmed on other grounds.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Specifically, the dissent contends that other terms of the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement revealed an intent that the issue of termination was not within the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  authority to decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We disagree.

\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [41]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab 
The dissent first contends that several provisions of the Agreement limit the scope of the arbitration clause, including the provisions which instruct that arbitrators may only decide issues identified in the arbitration notice and which bind t
he arbitrators to the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The dissent further identifies provisions of the Agreement which restrict issues in litigation to those not submitted to arbitration, and which clarifies that the arbitration procedures in the Agreement do not change the e
ffect of the Appellate Division case }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Government of Guam v. FHP, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  (Civil Case No. 90-00014A).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
These provisions of the Agreement do not limit the scope or subject matters cognizable under the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Furthermore, the provisions identified by the dissent are not relevant here.}
{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The circumstances covered by the aforementioned provisions are not present in the case }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 sub judice}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [42]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The dissent also identifies the automatic renewal clause as affecting the outcome of this case.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Paragraph 2.1 of the Agreement provided:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\ul\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\ul\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Term}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
This contract, in its original form, became effective August 1, 1973.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It shall renew automatically for one year each October 1}{\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 st}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  unless terminated for major default in availability or quality of services, gi
ven by written notice from the Government of Guam to PacifiCare not less than ninety (90) calendar days from the renewal date, or unless modified by mutual agreement.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par Appellant}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s ER, p. 172, vol. II of II (Agreement, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 2.1).}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
Similar provisions requiring continued coverage are set forth by statute.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  Title 4 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 4301(g)(1996); 42 U.S.C. }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 300gg-12(a).  Title 4 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 4301(g) states that the Governor shall:
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 incorporate the continuing provision clause made available to [GMHP], FHP, Inc. and Staywell, which was the sub
ject of the District Court of Guam Appellate Division Case }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Government of Guam v. FHP, Inc}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ., (D. Guam App. Div. 1991), in the government}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s group health insurance agreement with any health insurance company . . . which has contracted with the government of Guam for at least two (2) consecutive years.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 4 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 4301(g)(1996). Title 42 U.S.C. }{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 300gg-12(a) of HIPAA provides:
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 Except as 
provided in this section, if a health insurance issuer offers health insurance coverage in the small or large group market in connection with a group health plan, the issuer must renew or continue in force such coverage at the option of the plan sponsor o
f the plan.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 42 U.S.C.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 300gg-12(a).}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [43]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab We do not find the automatic renewal provision to render the question of termination non-arbitrable.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The automatic renewal provision evidences an intent that coverage be renewed automatically.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
It does not evidence an intent that the Agreement could never be terminated, or that a dispute as to whether termination is warranted is not arbitrable.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Furthermore, the fact that the Agreement enumerates specific circumstances where termination is allowed does not alter our conclusion that the issue of termination was within the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  authority to decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The circumstances enumerated in the Agreement warranting a ter
mination of coverage does not reveal an intent that only those circumstances be submitted for determination by the arbitrators.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The question of whether PacifiCare was obligated to continue coverage, or could terminate coverage, was a subject matter which could be considered by the arbitrators }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 specifically because}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  termination was permitted under the Agreement and law applicable to the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Whether or not termination was warranted under the facts viewed against the Agreement and relevant statutes goes to the merits of the dispute - a question explicitly reserved for the arbitrators in light of the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  broad arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
It would be incongruous to conclude that by specifying instances where termin
ation would be allowed, the parties necessarily intended to exclude from arbitration questions of termination which were not specified in the Agreement but otherwise arose out of the contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The parties cannot be expected to anticipate every possible issue or dispute that could arise, or every possible remedy for a dispute.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In determining the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 intent regarding the matters to be arbitrated, it suffices to view the arbitration clause and any other provision in the contract which explicitly excludes certain subjects from arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Here, the arbitration clause required that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Any dispute or controversy}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  between the parties arising under this Agreement shall be submitted to binding arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Appellant}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s ER, vol. II of II, p. 217 (Agreement, Attachment III, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  1.01).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Agreement contains no limitation on the subject matters which may be submitted to arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent could not be clearer.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The question of termination where the parties could not agree as to rates arose out of the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Therefore, the question was within the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  authority to decide.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 2.}{\b\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Non-Statutory Grounds
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [44]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab We next consider whether the lower court erred in vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award based on other grounds.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The lower court found that the arbitrators erred as a matter of law in concluding that PacifiCare was not obligated to provide coverage for FY 2004 under either HIPAA or the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vo
l. II of II, pp. 423-24 (Decision and Order, October 20, 2003, pp. 23-24).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The lower court concluded that such legal error supported vacating the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award on the ground that it was made in manifest dis
regard of the law, and was contrary to the essence of the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We disagree.}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi2160\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 a.}{\b\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Manifest Disregard of the Law
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [45]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab This court in }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo Constr. Co. v. Zhong Ye Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, recognized that courts have vacated arbitration awards based on a }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
manifest disregard of the law,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  which is }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 not statutory but rather a judicially recognized federal exception introduced by the United States Supreme Court in }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Wilko v. Swan}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 346 U.S. 427, 436-37 . . . (1953).}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  19 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Todd Shipyards Corp. v. Cunard Line Ltd}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 943 F.2d 1056 (9th Cir. 1991)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In fact, it has been recognized that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[m]anifest disregard of the law is the seminal non[-]statutory ground for vacatur of commercial arbitration awards.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Hayford, }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 supra}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , at 774.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [46]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab As recognized in }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , the Second Circuit has described the exception as follows:

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Although the bounds of [the manifest disregard of the law] ground have never been defined, it clearly means more than error or misunderstanding [by the arbitrator] with respect to the law.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The error must have been obvious and capable of being readily and instantly perceived by the average person qualified to serve as an arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Moreover, the term }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 disregard}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  implies that the arbitrator appreciates the existence of a clearly governing legal principle but decides to ignore or pay no attention to it. . . .}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Judicial inquiry under the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
manifest disregard}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  standard is therefore extremely limited.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The governing law alleged to have been ignored by the arbitrators must be well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  19 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Carte Blanche (Singapore) Pte., Ltd. v. Carte Blanche Int}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 l, Ltd.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 888 F.2d 260, 265 (2d Cir. 1989)).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [47]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Courts agree that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [m]anifest disregard of the law means something more than just an error in the law or a failure on the part of the arbitrators to understand or apply the law.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Luong v. Circuit City Stores, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 368 F.3d 1109, 1112 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Mich. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Unigard Sec. Ins. Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  44 F.3d 826, 832 (9th Cir.1995)); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Dawahare v. Spencer}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 210 F.3d 666, 669 (6th Cir. 2000) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 An arbitration decision must fly in the face of established legal precedent for us to find manifest disregard of the law.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (quotation marks omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We are not at liberty to set aside an arbitration panel}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s award because of an arguable difference regarding the meaning or applicability of laws urged upon it.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Carte Blanche (Singapore) Pte., Ltd. v. Carte Blanche Int}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 l, Ltd.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 888 F.2d 260, 265 (2d Cir. 1989).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 An arbitration panel acts with manifest disregard if (1) the applicable legal principle is clearly defined and not subject to reasonable debate; and (2) the arbit
rators refused to heed that legal principle.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Dawahare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 210 F.3d at 669 (quotation marks omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It must be clear from the record that the arbitrators recognized the applicable law and then ignored it.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Luong}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 368 F.3d at 1112 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Mich. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Unigard Sec. Ins. Co.,}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  44 F.3d 826, 832 (9th Cir.1995)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [48]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab This court has never explicitly adopted the manifest disregard of the law standard as a proper ground for vacating an arbitration award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Arbitration awards are widely tested against this standard by courts in other jurisdictions, and we herein adopt this standard as a valid basis for vacating an arbitration award in this jurisdiction.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 We find the manifest disregard ground to fall within the rubric of a statutory ground, section 10(a)(3) of the FAA, which allows a court to vacate an arbitration award }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 where the arb
itrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy; or any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced.
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10(a)(3).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 An arbitrator that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 refuses to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 id.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, commits the same type of prejudicial misconduct as an arbitrator that is aware of applicable law and consciously refuses to apply the law.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
In light of the stringent test required to demonstrate a manifest disregard of the law, we hold that an arbitration award made in manifest disregard of the law rises to the level of }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 misbehavior by which the rights of a[ ] party have been prejudiced}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  under 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10(a)(3).
}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [49]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In the present case, the lower court found that the arbitrators disregarded the law by failing to consider the importance of the continuing clause in the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
This conclusion is not supported by the record.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 PacifiCare correctly points out that HIPAA and the continuing clause in the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement were presented to the arbitrators for review.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Both parties addressed these provisions in relation to the dispute in their arbitration briefs.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, pp. 303-348 (Arbitration Briefs).}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Furthermore, it is clear that the arbitrators considered both HIPAA and the continuing clause in the Agreement in rendering their award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The two-paragraph arbitration award explicitly referenced both HIPAA and the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 continuing clause.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, p. 393 (Arbitration Award, October 1, 2003).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
There is nothing in the record which would suggest that the arbitrators ignored HIPAA or the continuing clause; rather, they were addressed in the award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Without deciding the iss
ue, the most that can be concluded is that the arbitrators erred in interpreting or applying the law.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
This type of error or misapplication of the law does not amount to a manifest disregard of the law.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Luong}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 368 F.3d at 1112 (indicating that the arb
itrator considered a case (}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Toyota)}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  relevant to the issues, and finding that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 without expressing a view one way or the other on whether the arbitrator got }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Toyota}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 right, it is clear that the arbitrator did not }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ignore}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  it. His written decision is part of the petition. Virtually every line of the opinion and award discusses }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Toyota}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  and how it plays out on the facts in Luong}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s case. That cannot amount to }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
manifest disregard of federal law.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [50]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In determining whether an arbitrator manifestly disregarded the law, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [t]he reviewing court should not concern itself with the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 correctness}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  of an arbitration award.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Where the parties have agreed to arbitration, the courts will not review the merits of the dispute.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thompson v. Tega-Rand Intern.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 740 F.2d 762, 763 (9th Cir. 1984).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Here, the arbitrators clearly interpreted the contract and considered relevant law.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Accordingly, we
 find that the lower court erred in vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 award on the ground that the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi2160\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 b.}{\b\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Essence of the Parties}{
\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [51]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  October 1, 2003 award, the lower court also held that the award violated the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 essence}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  of the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The court concluded:

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The essence of the agreement between the parties is its continuity and the method it has provided to promote continuity.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The very essence of the agreement mandates and demands continuity.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
When an arbitration award grants termination of the agreement without exploring and deciding the dispute which lead the parties to impasse (disagreement as to benefits and rates), the arbitration award goes against the very essence of the agreement.

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par ER, vol. II of II, p. 425 (Decision and Order, October 20, 2003, p. 25). 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [52]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Courts have adopted the essence ground, holding that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [a]n arbitration award may be overturned if it does not }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 draw its essence}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  from the contract.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Michigan Mut. Ins. Co. v. Unigard Sec. Ins. Co.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 44 F.3d 826, 830-31 (9th Cir. 1995) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Local Joint Exec. Bd. of Las Vegas v. Riverboat Casino, Inc.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 817 F.2d 524, 527 (9th Cir.1987)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 As discussed below, we find that the essence ground does not support vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award in this case; thus, we leave open the question of whether the essence test is a proper ground for vacating an award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [W]e are not presented with the proper justification necessitating our adoption and use of}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  the essence test.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Sumitomo Constr. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 8 at }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  20.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [53]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Courts adopting the essence test have found that in determining whether an arbitration award drew its essence from the contract, the focus is on whether }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 the arbitrator looked to the words of the contract and to the conduct of the parties.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Michigan Mut.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 44 F.3d at 831.}
{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 An award draws its essence from the agreement }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 so long as the interpretation can in some rational manner be derived from the agreement, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 viewed in the light of its language, its context, and any other indicia of the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intention; only where there is a manifest disregard of the agreement, totally unsupported by principles of contract construction and the law of the shop, may a reviewing court disturb the award.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Amoco Oil Co. v. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Int}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 l Union, Local 7-1, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 548 F.2d 1288, 1294 (7th Cir. 1977) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Ludwig Honold Manufacturing Co. v. Fletcher}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 405 F.2d 1123, 1128 (3d Cir. 1969)); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also Executone Info. Sys., Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 26 F.3d at 1320 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [W]e must affirm the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision if it is }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 rationally inferable}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  from the letter or the purpose of the underlying agreement.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Basically, an award fails to draw its essence from the agreement if it can be said that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
the award ignored the plain language of the contract.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
See Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 266 F.3d 979, 986-87 (9th Cir. 2001).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [54]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Furthermore, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [t]he Supreme Court has instructed that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
as long as the arbitrator is even arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority, that a court is convinced he committed serious error does not suffice to overturn his decision.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Jenkins v. Prudential-Bache Sec., Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 847 F.2d 631, 635 (10th Cir.1988) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
United Paperworkers Int'l Union v. Misco, Inc.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  484 U.S. 29, 38, 108 S. Ct. 364, 370-71 (1987)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 A court should not disturb }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 an arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision unless it can be said with positive assurance that the contract is not susceptible to the arbitrator}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s interpretation.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 at 635.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [55]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The question here is whether the arbitrators construed the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement, and whether the Agreement was at all susceptible to the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  interpretation }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 namely, that PacifiCare may be relieved of further obligations under the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Under the plain language of the Agreement, PacifiCare was required to renew the contract.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Paragraph 2.1 of the Agreement provided that the contract }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 shall renew automatically for one year each October 1}{\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 st}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  unless terminated for major default in availability or quality of services}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
ER, p. 172, vol. II of II (Agreement, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  2.1).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The parties were further required to come to some agreement as to rates and benefits, and that a dispute as to the rates for FY 2004 should be submitted, and therefore decided, by way of arbitration.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, pp. 173, 180-81 (Agreement }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 3.1, 5.1) (setting forth the timeline for negotiating rates); Supplemental Record on Appeal, (Decl. of David A. Mair, Ex. A) (stating that the parties shall submit disputes which were negotiated and not agreed upon to arbitration).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Notwithstanding these provisions in the Agreement, we cannot conclude with }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 positive assurance}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  that the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  conclusion to terminate coverage was not }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 rationally inferable}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  from the contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The precise remedy for determining rates where the parties could not agree on rates was not articulated }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 explicitly}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  under the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The terms of the Agreement did not clearly provide that should an impasse be reached as to rates, rates shall be determined by an arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Such silence on the issue could have led 
to an inference that should the parties disagree as to rates, and the Government did not wish to accept the rates proposed by PacifiCare after an earnest attempt by the parties to come to an agreement (as was the case here), PacifiCare was not bound to pr
ovide continued coverage.}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn 
}{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
This conclusion arguably finds support viewing the Agreement in light of the statutes relied upon by the arbitrators, specifically, HIPAA and local law.  The Agreement was silent on the remedy for a disagreement as to rates.  Fur
thermore, neither HIPAA nor local law offers a remedy in such circumstance.  In fact, HIPAA does not address the issue of rates.   }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 William F. Highberger, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 
Material on Health Care Law}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , in American Law Institute-American Bar Association Continuing Legal Education, July 23, 1998, Current Developments in Employment Law, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 available at}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 WESTLAW, SD06 ALI-ABA 395, 409 (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
HIPAA does not set premium rates but it does prohibit plans and issuers from charging an individual more than similarly situated individuals in the same plan because of health status.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ); }{\scaps\fs20\insrsid12613751 Paul J. Routh, Welfare Benefits Guide}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  3:18, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 available at }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 WESTLAW, WELFAREBG }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751  3:18 (2004) (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [HIPAA] does not limit the premiums that the insurer can charge the group.}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ); }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 see also }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 Greta E. Cowart, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 The 
Never Ending Story}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , in American Law Institute-American Bar Association Continuing Legal Education, July 7-11, 2003, Advanced Law of Pensions, Welfare Plans, and Deferred Compensation, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 available at}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751  WESTLAW, SJ013 ALI-ABA 663, 675 (stating that HIPAA does not }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
place any limits on the amount an individual may be charged for an individual health insurance policy and an issuer may collect medical information to use it only for determining premiums}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ).  
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12613751 The guaranteed renewal provision in HIPAA is subject to agreement for coverage by the }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 plan sponsor}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
, in this case, the Government.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 42 U.S.C. }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 300gg-12(a) (West, WESTLAW through P.
L. 108-295).  Under HIPAA, the issuer is only required to renew at the option of the plan sponsor.  One plausible conclusion under the facts of this case was that where the health care issuer (PacifiCare) proposes terms for renewal, which is rejected by t
he sponsor (the Government), then the sponsor has }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 de facto }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
rejected the offer and thereby opted against renewal of the coverage.  In such circumstance, HIPAA allows for nonrenewal.  Such conclusion arguably has some rational basis considering that local law and the parties}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  Agreement appear to be silent on the remedy to be applied where there is a disagreement as to rates.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 See }{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 JEFFREY D. MAMORSKY, HEALTH CARE BENEFITS LAW }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  16.03 (2004), found at WESTLAW, HCBL, }{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  16.03 (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 It is up to the states to regulate rates in order to make health coverage affordable. So where price is still a barrier to health coverage, the states will have to provide relief.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ); Routh,}{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751  supra}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 , }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  3:18 (}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [E]ven though the insurer is requi
red to accept the small employer, the cost of the coverage can be prohibitively high, at least under [HIPAA].  The real issue is how state law will factor into the equation.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 ).  }}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Under this interpretation, the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  decision, while perhaps a misinterpretation of the contract, was not necessarily a complete departure from the essence of the contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Jenkins}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 847 F.2d at 635 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The arbitrator may not ignore the plain language of the contract, but the parties having authorized the arbitrator to give meaning to the language of the agreement, a court should not reject an award on the ground that the arbitrator misread the contract.
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [56]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  \tab 
[T]he question for decision by a [ ] court asked to set aside an arbitration award . . . is not whether the arbitrator or arbitrators erred in interpreting the contract; it
 is not whether they clearly erred in interpreting the contract; it is not whether they grossly erred in interpreting the contract; it is whether they interpreted the contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
If they did, their interpretation is conclusive.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Hill}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 814 F.2d at 1195 (citations omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 In the present case, the arbitrators interpreted the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement, and their decision was rationally based on the terms of Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Assuming }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 arguendo}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  that the essence test was adopted as an appropriate ground for vacating an arbitration award in this jurisdiction, we could not conclude that the award in this case was made contrary to the essence of the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Accordingly, we hold
 that the lower court erred in vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  award on this ground.}{
\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }
{\fs20\insrsid12613751 PacifiCare raises several other grounds supporting the arbitrators}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  award, including th
e following: (1) the Government breached its contract by unilaterally demanding coverage, violating the procurement law, and unilaterally determining rates and benefits; (2) renewal for FY2004 was not required because the Government failed to timely pay p
remiums; (3) the Government cannot compel specific performance of the Agreement; (4) and enforcement of the Agreement is not allowed under the doctrine of }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 impossibility.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
  These issues have been rendered moot by our holding reversing the lower court}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s decision has rendered.  We therefore find it unnecessary to address these arguments.}{\insrsid12613751     }}}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 IV.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [57]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In accordance with the foregoing, we hold that the lower court erred in vacating the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  October 1, 2003 award.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
While the lower court was permitted to review whether the arbitrators exceeded their authority, the court was required to give the appropriate deference to the decisions of the arbitrators relating to procedural requirements for issuing the award.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The lower court erred in undertaking an independent review of these matters and in concluding that the arbitrators exceeded their authority by addressing the issue of PacifiCare}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s obligation to continue coverage for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Furthermore, the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s conclusion that the arbitrators erred as a matter of law on the merits did not support a finding that the arbitration award was made in manifest disregard of the law or contrary to the essence of the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Accordingly, the lower court}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision vacating the October 1, 2003 arbitration award is hereby }{
\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 REVERSED}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
\par 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 TORRES, J., Dissenting:}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [58]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The majority holds that the arbitrators had the authority to determine the issue of PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s continued obligation to provide coverage under the Agreement for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
I disagree with this holding for the reasons set forth below, and I therefore respectfully dissent.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [59]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab The lower court in this case determined that the arbitrators exceeded their authority in ruling on the issue of PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s continued obligation to provide coverage for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The court}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision was based on its finding that the arbitra
tors were not authorized to rule on issues which the parties did not reach an impasse.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The majority}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s analysis of the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s decision focuses on the lower court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s determination on the issue of impasse.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Specifically, the majority holds that the question of whether the parties reached an impasse on the issue of termination of coverage was a matter for the arbitrators to decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
I agree that the FAA applies to the present dispute, and that principles of interpretation governing cases under the FAA apply here.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Kanazawa, Ltd. v. Sound, Unlimited}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 440 F.2d 1239, 1240 (9th Cir. 1971); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  1 (West, WESTLAW through P.L. 108-295).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
I also agree that under the applicable law, procedural questions, including whether the parties reached an impasse on a particular issue, are matters for the arbitrators to decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 376 U.S. 543, 557, 84 S. Ct. 909, 918 (1964).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
However, as the majority correctly recognizes, arbitrators are only permitted to decide procedural matters related to subjects which are arbitrable in the first place.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, the 
issue of whether procedural requirements for arbitration have been met cannot be determined by the arbitrators unless it is first determined that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 that the parties are obligated to submit the subject matter of a dispute to arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 .
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [60]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In the present case, the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  implicit finding that an impasse existed on the issue of termination is immater
ial if the question of whether PacifiCare had a continuing obligation to provide coverage when the parties failed to mutually agree on the rates and benefits for FY 2004 was not a subject that the arbitrators had the authority to decide.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It is here that my view diverges from that of the majority.}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [61]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab It is settled law that the question of whether a dispute is arbitrable is for the court to decide absent }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 clear and unmistakable}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  evidence that the parties intended to reserve the question for the arbitrators.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 514 U.S. 938, 944, 115 S. Ct. 1920, 1924 (1995) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Comm. Workers}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 475 U.S. 643, 649, 106 S. Ct. 
1415, 1418-19) (brackets omitted); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see Lebanon Chem. Corp. v. United Farmers Plant Food}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 179 F.3d 1095, 1100 (8th Cir. 1999) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Without a clear and unmistakable delegation of the question of arbitrability to an arbitrator, the arbitrability of a dispute must be decided by the courts.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Viewing the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 Agreement, and specifically the arbitration clause, it is neither clear nor unmistakable that the parties intended for the arbitrators to determine their own authority to decide a particular dispute.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Carson v. Giant Food, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 175 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir. 1999) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [A]rbitration clauses that generally commit all interpretive disputes }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 relating to}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  or }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 arising out of}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  the agreement do not satisfy the clear and unmistakable test.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 McLaughlin Gormley King Co. v. Terminix Int}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 l Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  105 F.3d 1192, 1194 (8th Cir. 1997) (finding that the contract provision requiring arbitration of }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [a]ny controversy arising out of, or relating to this Agreement or any modification or extension hereof}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  did not }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 clearly and unmistakably evidence[ ] the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent to give the arbitrator power to determine arbitrability}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (alteration in original); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 cf. Spahr v. Secco}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 330 F.3d 1266, 1270 (10th Cir. 2003) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [P]rovisions to arbitrate all disputes arising out of or rela
ting to the overall contract, like the one at issue here, do not provide the requisite clear and unmistakable evidence }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 within the four corners of the [a]greement that the parties intended to submit the question of whether an agreement to arbitrate exists to an arbitrator.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (quoting }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Riley Mfg. Co. v. Anchor Glass Container Corp.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  157 F.3d 775, 780 (10th Cir. 1998)).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [62]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab 
Whether the parties intended to arbitrate the issue of termination when they could not mutually agree on rates and benefits was therefore a question for the court to decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See First Options}
{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 514 U.S. at 944-45, 115 S. Ct. at 1924.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Deciding this question is a matter of contract interpretation.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See id}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ., 514 U.S. at 944, 115 S. Ct. at 1924.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
In light of the policy favoring arbitration, doubts as to whether a particular issue is arbitrable are to be resolved in favor of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See First Options}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 514 U.S. at 943-44, 115 S. Ct. at 1924.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 However, this policy favoring arbitration cannot override the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Equal Employment Opportunity Comm}{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 n (}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 E.E.O.C.}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) v. Waffle House, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 534 U.S. 279, 294, 122 S. Ct. 754, 764 (2002) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Whil
e ambiguities in the language of the agreement should be resolved in favor of arbitration, we do not override the clear intent of the parties, or reach a result inconsistent with the plain text of the contract, simply because the policy favoring arbitrati
on is implicated.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (citing }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Volt Info. Scis., Inc. v. Bd. of Trs. of Leland Stanford Jr. Univ.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  489 U.S. 468, 476, 109 S. Ct. 1248, 103 L.Ed.2d 488 (1989)); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Carson}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 175 F.3d at 328-29.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The United States Supreme Court has recognized that:}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[T]he FAA does not require parties to arbitrate when they have not agreed to do so, nor does it prevent parties who do agree to arbitrate from excluding certain claims from the scope of their arbitration agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It simply requires courts to enforce privately negotiated agreements to arbitrate, like other contracts, in accordance with their terms. 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1080\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid16341234 {\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Volt Info. Scis., Inc. v. Bd. of Trs. of Leland Stanford Jr. Univ.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 489 U.S. 468, 478, 109 S. Ct. 1248, 1255 (1989) (citations omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[T]he purpose of Congress in 1925 was to make arbitration agreements as enforceable as other contracts, but not more so.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 388 U.S. 395, 404 n.12, 87 S. Ct. 1801, 1806 n.12 (1967).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Therefore, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[d]espite the public benefits of arbitration, the determination of what disputes are arbitrable is focused on the intent of the parties.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Carson}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 175 F.3d at 328-29; }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see also}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 U.S. Titan, Inc. v. Guangzhou Zhen Hua Shipping Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  241 F.3d 135, 146 (2d Cir. 2001) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Notwithstanding the strong federa
l policy favoring arbitration as an alternative means of dispute resolution, courts must treat agreements to arbitrate like any other contract.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (citation omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Because arbitration is a matter of contract, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Carson}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 175 F.3d at 328 (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
United Steelworkers of Am. v. Warrior & Gulf Nav. Co.,}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  363 U.S. 574, 582, 80 S. Ct. 1347, (1960)) (brackets omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [63]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Balancing the policy favoring arbitration with the importance of contractual intent, arbitration should be allowed where the arbitration clause 
is broad without limitations and is properly denied when the parties have contracted to limit the scope of arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Where an arbitration clause is not broad, courts must be sure that the parties contracted to arbitrate the issue at hand.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
[A]lthough the Federal Arbitration Act embodies a clear federal policy favoring arbitration agreements, such agreements must not be so broadly construed as to encompass claims that were not intended to be arbitrated under the original contract.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 AGCO Corp. v. Anglin}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 216 F.3d 589, 593 (7th Cir.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 2000) (citation omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 After reviewing the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 Agreement, it is my view that the parties did not intend to arbitrate the issue of termination where the parties could not mutually agree on rates and benefits for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [64]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
When deciding whether the parties agreed to arbitrate a certain matter . . . , courts generally . . . should apply ordinary state-law principles that govern the formation of contracts.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 First Options}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 514 U.S. at 944, 115 S. Ct. at 1924.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Guam law provides that, in construing a written contract, the contract language is used to determine the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Title 18 GCA }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  87105 (1994) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
When a contract is reduced to writing, the intention of the parties is to be ascertained from the writing alone, if possible . . . .}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 see}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Ronquillo v. Korea Auto, Fire & Marine Ins. Co.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
, 2001 Guam 25, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10 (stating that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 the intent of the parties is ascertained from the writing alone}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); Title 18 GCA }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  87104 (1994) (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
The language of a contract is to govern its interpretation, if the language is clear and explicit, and does not involve an absurdity.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ); }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Camacho v. Camacho}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 1997 Guam 5, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  33 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [I]n interpreting a clause of a contract to determine the intent of the contracting parties, whenever possible, the express language of the contract should control.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [65]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Here, the arbitrators decided whether PacifiCare could be released from their continuing obligation to provide coverage wher
e the parties did not agree on rates and benefits for FY 2004.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
PacifiCare argues, and the majority accepts, that the decision releasing PacifiCare from their continuing obligation is appropriate because it stems from a dispute or controversy covered by the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The Government}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s claim is essentially that it did not contract to arbitrate this grievance -- the release of PacifiCare from their continuing obligation, simply because PacifiCare made an offer that was not accepted.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Instead, the parties agreed that the contract would be renewed automatically and PacifiCare had a continuing obligation to provide coverage with the rates to be determined by the arbitrat}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
ors in the event of an impasse.}{\f0\insrsid12613751 
\par }{\f0\insrsid16341234\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [66]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab In discerning the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent on whether the issue of PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s continued obligation based on a failure to agree on rates and benefits was within the authority of the arbitrators to decide, the starting point is the language of the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Section 1.01 of Attachment III of the Agreement provides: }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Any dispute or controversy}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  between the parties arising under this Agreement shall be submitted to binding arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, p. 215 (Agreement, Attachment III, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  1.01).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 While general, the arbitration clause cannot be viewed in a vacuum, and must be considered against other provisions of the contract.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Yasuda Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Heights Enters., }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 1998 Guam 5, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  14 (}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Language in a contract must be construed in the context of that instrument as a whole and the circumstances of that case . . . .}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ) (quoting }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Bank of the West v. Superior Court}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 2 Cal. 4th 1254, 1265 9Cal. 1992)).}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
However broad may be the terms of a contract, it extends only to those things concerning which it appears that the parties intended to contract.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Title 18 GCA }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  87114 (1994).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, we should not read a contract more expansively than what the parties intended, as gleaned from all provisions of the contract.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 It is the law in this jurisdiction the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [t]he whole of a contract is to be taken together, so as to give effect to every part, if reasonably practicable, each clause helping to interpret the other.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Title 18 GCA }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  87107 (1994).
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [67]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Applying the aforementioned rules of interpretation, I conclude that the arbitration clause in this case cannot be characterized as }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 broad}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  in light of other provisions in the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  Agreement which limit the subject matters and scope of the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  authority.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [68]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab 
Sections 1.01.11 and 1.01.24 of Attachment III of the Agreement specifically limit the issues that the arbitrators may rule upon after a dispute has been submitted for their consideration.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Section 1.01.11 of Attachment III of the Agreement instructs that the arbitrators}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 decision must be limited to issues specified in the notice provided in Section 1.01.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Similarly, Section 1.01.24 states that, whi
le each party agrees to perform and to fulfill the award or finding concerning the matters submitted to arbitration, the arbitrators are bound by the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Both sections clearly indicate that the arbitrators cannot rule on }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 any dispute or controversy
}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  arising under the Agreement as the arbitration clause would initially suggest.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Other provisions of the Agreement further evidence the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent that not all issues will be covered by the arbitration clause.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Section 1.01.24 provides that pleadings in any action pending on the same matter submitted to arbitration }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 shall be deemed amended to limit the issues, if any, to those }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 not}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  covered by the arbitration.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 The majority suggest that this case does not come within the scope this particular part of Section
 1.01.24, when in fact litigation was pending concerning the dispute of PacifiCare}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s obligation to continue coverage for FY 2004.  This appeal arose out of a complaint filed by the Government to compel performance of the automatic renewal provision contained in the Agreement, thus triggering application of Section 1.01.24. }}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, p. 220 (Agreement, Attachment III, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  1.01.24) (emphasis added).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This section contemplates the existence of issues which are in fact cognizable in a court action and not arbitration.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 A final limitation is found in Section 2 of Attachment III of the Agreement, where the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
parties acknowledge that the revisions to the arbitration procedures . . . do not change the effect of the decision of the District Court of Guam Appellate Division in Civil Case No. 90-00014A on the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar
\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751 
  The Appellate Division case referred to is }{\i\insrsid12613751 Government of Guam v. FHP, Inc.}{\insrsid12613751 
, Civ. No. 90-00014A, 1991 WL 275584 (D. Guam App. Div. July 10, 1991).  There, the Government challenged the automatic renewal provision, similar to Paragraph 2.1 in this case, in a contract between the Government and PacifiCare}{\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 s predecessor in interest, FHP, Inc.  }{\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 . at * 7. }{\i\insrsid12613751  }{\insrsid12613751 
The Government alleged that the }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 automatic annual renewal clauses are effectively perpetual and thus void.}{\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751   }{\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 .  The Government further alleged that }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 because the contracts do not state a duration of the automatic annual renewal clauses, the health care service agreements are terminable by GovGuam after a reasonable time.}{
\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751   }{\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 .  The Appellate Division disagreed, approving the lower court}{\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 s finding that the agreement is }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid12613751 not expressly or impliedly perpetual,}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751  but rather, was }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 automatically renewed subject to written consent.}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751   }{
\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 .  The court concluded that }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 
[w]hile the agreements may therefore exist for a very long time, they may be terminated and thus are not in perpetuity.}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751   }{
\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 .  The court ultimately determined that the }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 
automatic annual renewal clauses are valid and enforceable.}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751   }{\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 . at * 11.       
\par }}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 ER, vol. II of II, p. 220 (Agreement, Attachment III, }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  2).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Construing the arbitration clause as broad and unlimited would render these latter two contractual provisions superfluous.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 To give the latter provisions appropriate significance, they are only rationally interpreted as limiting the scope of the matters which may be resolved by way of arbitration.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [69]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Because the arbitration clause is limited by other contract provisions, it is no
t at all clear that the parties intended to arbitrate termination after negotiations fail.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
If the arbitration clause were in fact broad and unlimited, it could more easily be concluded that any issue related to continued coverage is arbitrable to the extent that the issue arose out of the Agreement and the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  obligations under the Agreement.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
However, because the arbitration clause in this Agreement is limited as identified above, it cannot be concluded that the clause necessarily encompasses }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 any}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 dispute as to PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s obligation to continue coverage.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, in discerning the intent of the parties, other provisions of the Agreement must be considered.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [70]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab 
Paragraph 2 of the Agreement clearly provides that the contract shall renew automatically on the first day of the Fiscal Year unless terminated by the Government for major default in the availability or quality of services.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Importantly, the Agreement is silent on termination based on an allegation that PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s offer of rates was not accepted by the Government although the Agreement clearly contemplates termination of PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s obligation to continue coverage under other specified circumstances.}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
Under Paragraph 2.3, the contract may also be terminated in the event of non-payment due to a failure to appropriate funds.  Further, Paragraph 2.2
 reserves for PacifiCare the right to suspend performance or terminate membership in the event of nonpayment by subscribers.}{\insrsid12613751 \tab }}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [71]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab Considering these aspects of the Agreement, it can only be concluded that the parties did not intend that the issue of PacifiCare}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s obligation to continue coverage based on failed negotiations was in fact arbitrable.}{
\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }
{\fs20\insrsid12613751 Notably, the Agreement is also silent on termination based on a material breach for nonpayment of premiums.  Pacifi
Care asserts that the habitual late payment by the Government is a material breach of the contract and it is well settled law that a material breach excuses the other parties}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  performance.  Section 1.01.11 of Att
achment III specifically states that the arbitration award shall be based solely on the issues identified in the notice of issues provided in Section 1.01 of Attachment III.  Whether the parties agreed that the arbitrators could decide this issue need not
 be addressed here because the issue of non-payment was not included in PacifiCare}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 s notice provided in Section 1.01.}}}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Because the parties clearly meant for coverage to be renewed automatically, it is evident tha
t they intended for the arbitrators to decide only those questions related to aspects of coverage specified under the terms of the Agreement, and not the obligation to offer continued coverage under circumstances not contemplated under the Agreement.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 By including specific circumstances where termination is allowed, (e.g. for major default in the quality of services or the lack of an appropriation), the arbitrators}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  authority to decide questions of termination was limited.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Such limitation influences the outcome here.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Because termination for a failure to negotiate rates was not a circumstance warranting termination under the Agreement, it is apparent that the parties did not intend for this issue to be decided by the arbitrators.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 To hold otherwise eviscerates the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 contractual obligations and is in contravention of the Agreement}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s continuing clause.
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [72]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab This interpretation of the Agreement does not conflict with any recognized policy.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Unlike in labor cases, for example, where it is agreed that the arbitrator has specialized knowledge which promotes the use of arbitration as a matter
 of policy, the arbitration scheme in the present case does not reflect the presence of specialized institutional competence which is more apt in administering the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  rights under the contract.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See Gateway Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers of Am.}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 414 U.S. 368, 377-379, 94 S. Ct. 629, 637 (1974).}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar
\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751   In }{
\i\insrsid12613751 Gateway Coal Co. v. United Mineworkers of America}{\insrsid12613751 , the United States Supreme Court enunciated the standard in determining whether an issue is arbitrable under a collective-bargaining agreement, stating that }{
\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 
[a]n order to arbitrate the particular grievance should not be denied unless it may be said with positive assurance th
at the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Doubts should be resolved in favor of coverage.}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751   }{\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 ., 414 U.S. 368, at 378-79, 94 S. Ct. at 632 (quoting }{\i\insrsid12613751 
United Steelworkers of America v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.}{\insrsid12613751 , 363 U.S. 574, 582--583, 80 S. Ct. 1347, 1353 (1960).  The Court further recognized the basis for this liberal standard, stating that 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\insrsid12613751 commercial arbitra
tion and labor arbitration have different objectives.  In the former case, arbitration takes the place of litigation, while in the latter }{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid12613751 arbitration is the substitute for industrial strife.}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 
  A collective-bargaining agreement cannot define every minute aspect of the complex and continuing relationship between the parties.  Arbitration provides a method for resolving the unforeseen disagreements that inevitably arise. A
nd in resolving such disputes, the labor arbitrator necessarily and appropriately has resort to considerations foreign to the courts: 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\insrsid12613751 The labor arbitrator}{\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 s source of law is not confined to the express provision
s of the contract, as the industrial common law--the practices of the industry and the shop--is equally a part of the collective bargaining agreement although not expressed in it. The labor arbitrator is usually chosen because of the parties}{
\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12613751 
 confidence in his knowledge of the common law of the shop and their trust in his personal judgment to bring to bear considerations which are not expressed in the contract as criteria for judgment.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\i\insrsid12613751 Id}{\insrsid12613751 .  (quoting }{\i\insrsid12613751 United Steelworkers}{
\insrsid12613751 , 363 U.S. at 578, 581-82, 80 S. Ct. at 1351-53). 
\par }}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 There is nothing that would suggest that the arbitrators have any specialized knowledge which the parties would reasonably expect be accorded special reliance.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 So, too, there is nothing which would suggest that the parties would expect any different standard to apply in determining whether a particular claim is arbitrable.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Thus, like the question of who should decide questions of arbitrability, where the i
ntent of the parties to arbitrate questions of arbitrability must be clear and unmistakable, there is little reason to apply a lesser standard of proof in determining whether the parties agreed that a particular subject matter should be arbitrated.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Both inquiries require the same fundamental determination -- that of the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The majority seems to suggest that a lesser standard of proof is required to determine whether a particular claim is arbitrable.}{
\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 This manner of interpretation is debatable, for even a pro-arbitration interpretation of the contract cannot override the parties}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  intent as evidenced in the Agreement.}{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12613751  It is particularly appropriate that th
e court closely scrutinize the parties}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  intent under the Agreement regarding the scope of the arbitrators}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 authority to determine issues.  This is because the Agreement appears to give one party the unilateral ability to frame the issues presented for arbitration.  While it is clear that the notice provided in Section 1.01 cannot alter the contract or the arb
itrators}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 authority under the contract, by allowing one party the ability to specify the issues, an opportunity exists to mingle non-arbitrable issues with arbitrable ones.  The availability of this opportunity ne
cessitates a more searching review of whether the issues actually submitted or ruled upon were within the arbitrators}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
 authority to decide as evidenced under the Agreement }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  for it is the Agreement which encompasses the intent of }{
\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 both}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  parties.  }}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }{\b\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [73]}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \tab A judge may vacate an arbitration award if the }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 arbitrators exceeded their powers.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 9 U.S.C. }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  10(a)(4) (West, WESTLAW through P.L. 108-295).
}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
An arbitrator exceeds his powers when he acts without subject matter jurisdiction, [or] decides an issue that was not submitted to arbitration . . . .}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Jordan v. Cal. Dep}{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 t of Motor Vehicles}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 122, 131 (Ct. App. 2002) (citations omitted).}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 Agreement in this case must be viewed as a whole, with each provision interpreted in light of each other, so as to give effect to every part, if reasonably practicable.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 See }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 18 GCA }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234  87107.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 When the intent is clear, the court must give effect to that intent. }{\cs15\f0\super\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f41\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid12613751 \chftn }{\insrsid12613751  }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 Even if it is concluded that the question of the arbitrability of PacifiCare}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
s obligation to continue coverage was ambiguous under the terms of the Agreement, such ambiguity must be resolved, as a matter of law, against PacifiCare.  Section 87120 of Title 18 of the GCA states that where uncertainty is not removed by the general me
thods of statutory interpretation, }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
the language of a contract should be interpreted most strongly against the party who caused the uncertainty to exist.}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 
  Title 18 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751  87120 (1992).  Furthermore, }{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 [t]he promisor is presumed to be such party; except in a contract between a public officer or body, as such, and a private party, }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 in whic
h it is presumed that all uncertainty was caused by private party}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 .}{\fs20\insrsid12613751 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12613751   }{\i\fs20\insrsid12613751 Id}{
\fs20\insrsid12613751 . (emphasis added).  Applying this rule of construction, an interpretation favoring the Government must prevail.}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Interpreting the parties}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
 Agreement, it is clear that the Government bargained for the contract to continue each year and did not intend to arbitrate the question of PacifiCare}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 s continued obligation to offer coverage where the parties could not simply agree on rates.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
Thus, the arbitrators ignored the Agreement}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
s clear contractual limitations regarding their authority.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 The arbitrators acted on a subject which they had no authority to decide.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Arbitration under the [FAA] is a matter of consent, not coercion . . . .}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Volt Info. Sciences, Inc.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 489 U.S. at 479, 109 S. Ct. at 1256.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }
{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 To uphold the arbitration award in this case would disregard the principle that }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 [t]he parties--not the courts--control which disputes will be arbitrated.}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
 }{\i\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 Carson}{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 , 175 F.3d at 329.}{\f0\insrsid16341234  }{\f0\insrsid12613751\charrsid16341234 For this reason, I respectfully dissent.}{\f0\insrsid16341234 
\par }}