Share 
Bonus TL;DR
- A U.S. District Court confirmed an arbitration award in favor of Stake.us and denied a motion to vacate, ruling that the operator’s Terms and Conditions clearly delegated questions of arbitrability directly to the arbitrator.
- The court confirmed the award under Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act and the New York Convention on foreign arbitral awards, leaving the underlying class-action allegations regarding illegal gambling and money laundering unadjudicated.
A U.S. District Court confirmed an arbitration award involving Stake.us on Oct. 16, 2026, and denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate it.
The decision upholds an award limited to arbitrability: whether the parties’ dispute over an arbitration clause can be resolved through arbitration. It does not decide the underlying allegations that Stake.us evaded gambling and money laundering laws.
According to Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, the court found that the platform’s Terms and Conditions clearly delegated authority to the arbitrator to determine arbitrability questions.
Stake’s Terms Delegated Arbitrability Questions
The plaintiffs filed a putative class action in May 2025, alleging that Stake’s online gaming platform evaded gambling and money laundering laws through allegedly sham sweepstakes casinos at Internet cafés. Those claims are allegations, not findings in this ruling.
The American Arbitration Association entered the award on July 30, 2026, addressing the arbitrability dispute over the gaming contract’s arbitration clause.
The plaintiffs sought to vacate the award under 9 U.S.C. §10(a)(4), arguing that the arbitrator exceeded her powers. The court rejected that argument because the Terms and Conditions specifically assigned arbitrability questions to the arbitrator.
In an opinion excerpt published by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, the court said the terms constituted “a clear and specific agreement to delegate the authority to determine arbitrability questions to the arbitrator.”
International Convention Supplies Basis for Confirmation
The court found that the award satisfied Chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act and the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
The agreement governed the plaintiffs’ access to and use of Stake’s website. It involved two individuals domiciled in the United States and a foreign limited company organized in Cyprus, with its principal place of business in Australia.
Because the award fell under the Convention, the court found that 9 U.S.C. §207 supplied the statutory basis for confirmation. It therefore did not need to resolve the plaintiffs’ separate objection to confirmation under §9.
If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, call 1-800-GAMBLER.
More from bonus.com – Bryn Kenney Sues GGPoker Owner NSUS Over Alleged 5% Equity Stake, Commission Cuts – Florida AG Sues Sweepstakes Casino Operators Stake and VGW over Illegal Gambling
Source: As reported by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.
