DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 
 
JACK SOTO, 
 
  
 
 
) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
 
 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
 
) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
 
 
v.  
 
 
 
 
)  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
)  
Civil Action No. 2009-096 
 
F & M MAFCO, INC., CHRISTIANSTED    
)  
 
  
 
EQUIPMENT LTD, and DAN McKENNA,  
) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
 
 
 
Defendants.  
 
) 
__________________________________________) 
 
Attorneys: 
Rachel Morrison, Esq., 
St. Croix, USVI 
 
For the Plaintiff 
 
Charles Lockwood, Esq., 
St. Croix, USVI 
 
For the Defendants  
ORDER 
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, pursuant to 
the Order of the Arbitrator, which was filed on September 20, 2011.  (Dkt. No. 33).  Plaintiff has 
not filed a response. 
On June 8, 2010, the Court granted Defendants’ Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending 
Arbitration, compelled arbitration, and stayed the case during the pendency of the arbitration.  
(Dkt. No. 29).  In the instant Motion to Dismiss, Defendants seek dismissal of the case on the 
grounds that arbitration has been completed.  Defendants include with their Motion the 
Arbitrator’s Order dismissing Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice.  (See Dkt. No. 33-1).     
An arbitrator's decision is binding under the Federal Arbitration Act unless “an arbitrator 
manifests an infidelity to her obligation to interpret the agreement at issue, or there is corruption, 
Case: 1:09-cv-00096-WAL-GWC   Document #: 34   Filed: 03/14/12   Page 1 of 2
2 
 
fraud or partiality, or a party was denied a fundamentally fair hearing.”  Apex Fountain Sales v. 
Kleinfeld, 818 F.2d 1089, 1094–95 & n.4 (3d Cir. 1987) (citations and internal quotations 
omitted).  Here, Plaintiff has not opposed Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or otherwise alleged 
that the Arbitrator’s decision is infirm.  Because arbitration has been completed and Plaintiff’s 
claims were dismissed with prejudice by the Arbitrator, the Court finds that dismissal of the 
action with prejudice is appropriate.  Bouton v. Government of Virgin Islands, 987 F.2d 162, 168 
(3d Cir. 1993) (“Since the Union agreed to arbitrate the dispute, the Union is bound by the 
arbitrator's decision to dismiss its claims.”).  Accordingly, the Court will grant Defendants’ 
Motion. 
UPON CONSIDERATION of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, the entire record herein 
and for the reasons stated above, it is hereby, 
ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; and it is further 
ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 
SO ORDERED. 
     Date: March 14, 2012 
      
           
_______/s/________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WILMA A. LEWIS 
District Judge 
 
Case: 1:09-cv-00096-WAL-GWC   Document #: 34   Filed: 03/14/12   Page 2 of 2