The District Court remanded the matter to the State Court on the grounds that the arbitration agreement was not covered by the New York Convention as it was domestic in all aspects.
The arbitration agreement was contained in the plaintiff's partnership agreement with the defendant. Both parties were U.S. citizens (the plaintiff resided and practised law in California and the defendant was a Delaware limited liability partnership firm), the partnership agreement was subject to the laws of the State of Delaware and the enforcement of an eventual award under the agreement was envisaged to take place within the U.S. The Court rejected the relevance of the defendant firm's foreign patronage, holding that defendant's status as part of a Swiss-law recognised group of companies did not imply that the partnership agreement between the parties contemplated foreign performance. The Court ruled that to fall under the Convention, the parties' relationship must have contemplated overseas action or involvement, which was missing under the agreement. For the Court, the plaintiff's handling of international clients as a Dentons partner was not sufficient to satisfy the "performance abroad" requirement.