United States District Court, D. Colorado
RAYMOND P. MOORE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Cequent Performance Products, Inc.'s ("Cequent") motion to stay (ECF No. 50) the matter pending resolution of Cequent's appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (ECF No. 49). Plaintiff Let's Go Aero, Inc. ("LGA") opposes Defendant's motion. (ECF No. 51.)
For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion to stay.
I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND
A. Factual Background
The Court previously set forth the relevant factual background in its prior order. (ECF No. 46 at 1-4.)
B. Procedural Background
On January 28, 2015, the Court granted, in part, and denied, in part, Defendant's motion to compel arbitration. (ECF No. 46.) The Court found that Claims One, Two, Three, Six, Ten, and Twelve of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 15) were arbitrable. (ECF No. 46 at 22.) The Court stayed the matter as to those claims pending de novo resolution of Cequent Performance Products, Inc. v. Let's Go Aero, Inc., 1:14-CV-08457 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (hereinafter " Illinois Action "). (ECF No. 46 at 20-22.) The Court denied, in part, Defendant's motion to compel arbitration as to Claims Four, Five, Seven, Eight, Nine, and Eleven of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 15), and reserved ruling on whether to stay the entire proceedings. (ECF No. 46 at 23.)
On February 3, 2015, Defendant filed a notice of appeal to the Federal Circuit. (ECF No. 47.) On February 4, 2015, Defendant moved to stay this matter pending resolution of its appeal. (ECF No. 50.)
II. LEGAL STANDARDS
A. Federal Arbitration Act
Section 16(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"), in pertinent part, provides that: An appeal may be taken from-
(1) an order-
(A) refusing a stay of any action under section 3 ...