Tuesday, April 14, 2026
Page 3
Failure to Audio-Record Proceeding Doesn’t Invalidate Arbitrators’ Award—Ninth Circuit
By a MetNews Staff Writer
Failure of arbitrators to make certain a proceeding was being electronically recorded, coupled with their alleged incessant interruptions of the plaintiff, did not require that a District Court judge vacate an award, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held yesterday, affirming the judgment.
A panel—comprised of Circuit Judges Daniel P. Collins and Jacqueline H. Nguyen, along with Senior Circuit Judge Richard C. Tallman—rebuffed the contention by investor Salah Uddin that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Dispute Resolution Service arbitrators’ award in favor of defendant TD Ameritrade, Inc., a trading platform (subsequently acquired by Charles Schwab) was erroneously confirmed.
Uddin sued after TD froze his account when it reached a negative balance of -$66,291.60 in light of unwise investments. The plaintiff blamed TD, claiming “a series of systemic and operational failures, ranging from persistent platform glitches and stall outs, account and margin misrepresentations, failures of the broker-dealer’s performance of duties and standards of conduct as defined by securities regulation, and the mismanagement of [his] funds.”
He sought more than $1 million in damages.
Acting in pro se, Uddin argued in the District Court that, under 9 U.S.C. §10(a), a provision of the Federal Arbitration Act, the award the arbitrators made against him must be vacated based on “misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced” and each of the other three bases. He maintained:
“The arbitrators’ failure to ensure the existence of the recording as transcript of the hearing, coupled with their discouragement of my presenting comprehensive legal arguments and evidence presentation, constitutes serious misconduct.”
District Court Ruling
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. of the Northern District of California said in his July 18, 2024 ruling confirming the award:
“Throughout his briefing, Plaintiff criticizes the arbitrators’ failure to properly record the proceedings and their frequent interruptions of his presentation. Based on this alleged misconduct, Plaintiff seeks vacatur of the award under each prong of § 10(a), and on the basis of alleged public policy considerations. But even if the Court were to find Plaintiffs petition was timely and considered the merits of the motion, he has failed to carry his heavy burden of showing that the arbitration award should be vacated.”
He added that “Plaintiff does not provide any authority that such a recording was required, let alone that the award was procured by fraud or immoral conduct because there was no recording.”
Ninth Circuit Decision
Affirming, in a memorandum opinion, the panel said:
“Even assuming arguendo that the arbitrators’ inadvertent failure to record the proceedings, as required by the arbitration agreement, amounts to ‘misbehavior,’ Uddin failed to show that his rights have been prejudiced by the absence of a recording or transcript of the proceedings.”
They declared that “the mere absence of a record, by itself, is insufficient to show that Uddin failed to” receive a fair hearing.
The judges continued:
“Uddin contends that the arbitrators were ‘repeatedly interrupting, rushing, and pressuring [his] presentation of evidence and arguments’ and that one arbitrator told him, as a pro se, to ‘leave the law to [them].’ These contentions are insufficient to show that the arbitrators exceeded the bounds of efficient management of the hearing and instead behaved in a fundamentally unfair manner that prejudiced Uddin’s ability to present his case. Indeed, Uddin has not identified any particular argument or evidence that he was unable to raise as a result of the arbitrators’ conduct.”
The case is Uddin v. TD Ameritrade, Inc., 24-5073.
Copyright 2026, Metropolitan News Company