In order to grant a motion brought pursuant to these provisions, the Court must find that (i) there exists a written agreement to arbitrate, (ii) the dispute in question falls within the scope of that arbitration agreement, and (iii) the party seeking an arbitral forum has not waived its right to arbitration. Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co. v. New England Tel. Tel. Co., 62 F. Supp.2d 152, 155 (D.Me. 1999). "The question whether the parties agreed to arbitrate certain matters [is] for the court to decide."
Therefore, in deciding a motion to compel arbitration, a court must first determine "whether '... there exists a written agreement to arbitrate.' " Combined Energies v. CCI, Inc., 514 F.3d 168, 171 (1st Cir. 2008) (quoting Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co. v. New Eng. Tel. & Tel. Co., 62 F.Supp.2d 152, 155 (D. Me. 1999) ). The burden of making that showing lies on the party seeking to compel arbitration.
(i) there exists a written agreement to arbitrate, (ii) the dispute in question falls within the scope of that arbitration agreement, and (iii) the party seeking an arbitral forum has not waived its rights to arbitration. Id. at 7 (quoting Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co. v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co. , 62 F. Supp. 2d 152, 155 (D. Me. 1999) ). As to the first factor, the Estate claims that "there can be no dispute that there is a written agreement to arbitrate."
Federal courts will grant a motion to stay a case and compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA when "(i) there exists a written agreement to arbitrate, (ii) the dispute falls within the scope of that arbitration agreement, and (iii) the party seeking an arbitral forum has not waived its right to arbitration." Combined Energies v. CCI, Inc., 514 F.3d 168, 171 (1st Cir. 2008) (quoting Bangor Hydro-Elec. Co. v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 62 F. Supp. 2d 152, 155 (D. Me. 1999)). DISCUSSION
These three requirements are: (1) a written agreement to arbitrate exists, (ii) the dispute falls within the scope of that arbitration agreement, and (iii) the party seeking an arbitral forum has not waived its right to arbitration. Id. (citing Bangor Hydro–Electric Co. v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 62 F.Supp.2d 152, 155 (D.Me.1999)). The four requirements of the InterGen N.V. test include the three requirements discussed in Combined Energies. Furthermore, the First Circuit Court of Appeals still uses the InterGen N.V. test.