<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>Shahid Beheshti University</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Legal Research Quarterly</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>1024-0772</Issn>
				<Volume>27</Volume>
				<Issue>4</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2025</Year>
					<Month>01</Month>
					<Day>20</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>ENFORCEMENT OF DOMESTIC ARBTRAL AWARDS IN THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>ENFORCEMENT OF DOMESTIC ARBTRAL AWARDS IN THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>19</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>34</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">103687</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.48308/jlr.2023.117131.1118</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mehdi</FirstName>
					<LastName>Sepehri</LastName>
<Affiliation>. PhD, Faculty of Law, Theology &amp; Islamic Thoughts, Islamic Azad University: Najaf Abad Branch, Najaf Abad,
Iran</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Nejadali</FirstName>
					<LastName>Almasi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Theology &amp; Islamic Thoughts, Islamic Azad University: Najaf Abad Branch,
Najaf Abad, Iran</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0009-0007-6575-2894</Identifier>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Manuchehr</FirstName>
					<LastName>Tavasoli Naini</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Theology &amp; Islamic Thoughts, Islamic Azad University: Najaf Abad Branch,
Najaf Abad, Iran</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2018</Year>
					<Month>02</Month>
					<Day>06</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Arbitration has been considered as a most significant alternative dispute resolution process in United States of America. In relating to enforcement of arbitration awards there are a principal source of law: &quot;Federal Arbitration Act&quot; which is adopted in 1925.Articles 9-14 of this statute contains provisions about enforcement and obstacles to arbitration awards. Enforcement of arbitral awards requires the judicial procedures and supervisions in United States. In accordance with this law the party who is seeking for enforcement must file a motion (confirmation request) and bring necessary documents to the appropriate court during one year. Arbitration awards are not enforceable without judicial confirmation. Vacation, modification and correction of arbitral awards have limitative statutory grounds which are stipulated in the law. The courts are uncertain concerning to whether non-statutory grounds for vacating of awards accepted. Despite of this doubt, however, the other grounds have been created in U.S judicial precedent. Nonetheless both legislature and courts in U.S.A endeavor for esteem and prevalence of arbitration process and ordain some circumscriptions for enforcement and vacating of arbitration awards.</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Arbitration has been considered as a most significant alternative dispute resolution process in United States of America. In relating to enforcement of arbitration awards there are a principal source of law: &quot;Federal Arbitration Act&quot; which is adopted in 1925.Articles 9-14 of this statute contains provisions about enforcement and obstacles to arbitration awards. Enforcement of arbitral awards requires the judicial procedures and supervisions in United States. In accordance with this law the party who is seeking for enforcement must file a motion (confirmation request) and bring necessary documents to the appropriate court during one year. Arbitration awards are not enforceable without judicial confirmation. Vacation, modification and correction of arbitral awards have limitative statutory grounds which are stipulated in the law. The courts are uncertain concerning to whether non-statutory grounds for vacating of awards accepted. Despite of this doubt, however, the other grounds have been created in U.S judicial precedent. Nonetheless both legislature and courts in U.S.A endeavor for esteem and prevalence of arbitration process and ordain some circumscriptions for enforcement and vacating of arbitration awards.</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">arbitration</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Enforcement of awards</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">vacation of awards</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">confirmation of awards</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Grounds for vacating awards</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_103687_d89783c93eb14cd893d9003c9cb1880d.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
