Summary
This D.C. Circuit opinion addresses whether the Virgin Islands Housing Finance Authority timely moved to vacate an arbitration award under the Federal Arbitration Act and whether it could alternatively seek review under the Administrative Procedure Act. The court held that the Authority failed to serve its motion within the FAA’s strict three-month deadline, rejecting the argument that an allegedly void award bypasses this time limit. Additionally, the court ruled that the FAA provides a special and adequate alternative remedy, thereby precluding parallel judicial review under the APA. The district court’s dismissal was affirmed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Authority timely served notice of its FAA motion
- Whether the FAA precludes the Authority’s APA claim
Holdings
- The Authority did not timely serve notice; the three‑month deadline under 9 U.S.C. §12 applies regardless of whether the award is void or issued without a quorum.
- The FAA precludes the APA claim because the FAA provides an exclusive, adequate review procedure and the two statutes are incompatible.
Key quotations
“The FAA’s text offers no support for the Authority’s proposed carveout. By its terms, the notice deadline applies to any motion to vacate “an award,” and is triggered when the award is “filed or delivered.”” (728 F. Supp. 3d at 24)
“The FAA precludes the Authority’s APA claim because the FAA provides its own exclusive review procedure and the two are incompatible in major respects.” (728 F. Supp. 3d at 30)
Factual background
After two Category 5 hurricanes in 2017, FEMA provided disaster‑relief funding to the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Virgin Islands Housing Finance Authority contracted for reconstruction, incurred hundreds of millions of dollars, and sought reimbursement from FEMA. The Authority elected arbitration before the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; the three‑member panel issued an award on June 28 2023, but one arbitrator was on extended leave, leaving only two members to decide. The Authority moved to vacate the award under the FAA and also asserted an APA claim.
Procedural history
The district court held that the Authority missed the three‑month deadline to serve notice of its FAA motion and that the APA claim was precluded because the FAA provides an exclusive review scheme. The Authority appealed both holdings.