holding that FAA preempted Texas Arbitratìon Act's requirement that party's attorney sign agreement
How later courts described this case
- holding that FAA preempted Texas Arbitratìon Act's requirement that party's attorney sign agreement
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ACCEPTED
01-15-00867-CV
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
HOUSTON, TEXAS
11/24/2015 10:18:56 AM
CHRISTOPHER PRINE
CLERK
NO. 01-15-00867-CV
FILED IN
1st COURT OF APPEALS
HOUSTON, TEXAS
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
11/24/2015 10:18:56 AM
HOUSTON, TEXAS CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE
Clerk
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, L.L.C. & PENN VIRGINIA OIL AND
GAS L.P., Appellants.
V.
ALFREDO DE LA GARZA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT OF FRIEND
FOR XXXXXX XX XX XXXXX AND XXXXXXXX XX XX XXXXX,
MINORS
&
JOHN PAUL ADAME, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT OF FRIEND OF
XXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXX, XXX, AND
XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX, MINORS,
Appellees.
On Appeal from the 215TH Judicial District Court,
Harris County, Texas
Cause No. 2014-42519
APPELLANTS’ RESPONSE TO APPELLEE’S
MOTION TO DISMISS
To the Honorable Justices of the First Court of Appeals:
Appellants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas,
L.P. (collectively “Penn Virginia”) file this Response to Appellee Alfredo De La
Garza’s Motion to Dismiss. In support thereof, Penn Virginia would respectfully
show this Honorable Court as follows:
1. In his Motion at paragraphs 5 and 6, Appellee argues that Penn
Virginia’s appeal should be dismissed because Penn Virginia filed its Notice of
Appeal outside of the 20 day deadline to do so under Texas Rule of Appellate
Procedure 28.1, and that Penn Virginia failed to “reasonably explain the need for
an extension” in its Motion for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal. (See
Penn Virginia’s Motion for Extension of Time to File, attached as Exhibit A, and
Penn Virginia’s Reply to Appellees’ Objection, attached as Exhibit B.)
2. Rather than reiterate all of the arguments made and facts asserted in
Penn Virginia’s underlying Motion for Extension of Time to File and Penn
Virginia’s Reply to Appellees’ Objection to same, Penn Virginia would simply
direct this Court to those Motions and the affidavits submitted in support of same,
all of which are attached to this Response as Exhibits A and B, and which are on
file with this Court. Penn Virginia would show further that this Court has not
denied Penn Virginia’s Motion for Extension, therefore, there has been no judicial
determination that the Court lacks jurisdiction as a result of the date of filing. That
is to say, if this Court grants Penn Virginia’s Motion for Extension to File, then
Penn Virginia’s Notice of Appeal filed on October 13, 2015 will be considered
timely filed and there will be no question as to jurisdiction.
CONCLUSION & PRAYER
In light of the foregoing, Appellants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC and
Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, L.P. pray that this Court deny Appellee’s Motion to
Dismiss. Penn Virginia further prays for such other and further relief, both special and
general, at law and in equity, to which it may be justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
GALLOWAY, JOHNSON, TOMPKINS
BURR & SMITH
/s/ Thomas J. Smith
Thomas J. Smith
State Bar No. 00788934
tsmith@gallowayjohnson.com
Kelly C. Hartmann
State Bar No. 24055631
khartmann@gallowayjohnson.com
Alexis B. Hester
State Bar No. 24072807
ahester@gallowayjohnson.com
1301 McKinney, Suite 1400
Houston, Texas 77010
(713) 599-0700
(713) 599-0777 – facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS, PENN
VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, LLC AND
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that, in accordance with Rule 9.5 of the Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure, I have served the foregoing document upon the following
attorneys by electronic service, personal mail, by commercial delivery service or
by fax on November 24th, 2015:
John David Hart J. Javier Gutierrez
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN DAVID HART Ana Laura Gutierrez
Wells Fargo Tower THE GUTIERREZ LAW FIRM, INC.
201 Main Street, Suite 1720 700 East Third Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Alice, Texas 78332
Phone 817-870-2102 Phone 361-664-7377
Fax 817-332-5858 Fax 361-664-7245
Counsel for Appellee, Alfredo Counsel for Appellee, John Paul
De La Garza and his minor children Adame and his minor children
/s/ Kelly C. Hartmann
Kelly C. Hartmann
ACCEPTED
01-15-00867-CV
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
HOUSTON, TEXAS
10/14/2015 4:27:54 PM
CHRISTOPHER PRINE
CLERK
NO. 01-15-00867-CV
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
HOUSTON, TEXAS
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, L.L.C. & PENN VIRGINIA OIL AND
GAS L.P., Appellants.
V.
ALFREDO DE LA GARZA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT OF FRIEND
FOR XXXXXX XX XX XXXXX AND XXXXXXXX XX XX XXXXX,
MINORS
&
JOHN PAUL ADAME, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT OF FRIEND OF
XXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXX, XXX, AND
XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX, MINORS,
Appellees.
On Appeal from the 215TH Judicial District Court,
Harris County, Texas
Cause No. 2014-42519
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL
To the Honorable Justices of the First Court of Appeals:
Appellants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas,
L.P. (collectively “Penn Virginia”) file this Motion for Extension of Time to File
EXHIBIT "A"
Notice of Appeal pursuant to Rules 26.3 and 10.5(b)(2). In support thereof, Penn
Virginia would respectfully show this Honorable Court as follows:
I. FACTUAL SUMMARY
1. This appeal arises out of a September 11, 2015 Order denying
Appellant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Abate, which was filed in the
215th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas.1 The underlying litigation,
which is currently set for trial on May 31, 2016, involves an April 29, 2014 oilfield
incident near Shiner, Texas, in which two employees of Nabors Completion &
Productions Services Co. (“NCPS”) were injured when an improperly constructed
high pressure flow line parted and caused the sudden release of pressurized gas.
The two employees (now, Appellees) were standing near the flow line when the
line separated. NCPS was a well site contractor that had been hired by Penn
Virginia, the operator, to perform workover operations. Both Appellees were
members of the NCPS day crew.
2. Nabors Industries, Inc. (“Nabors”) and its subsidiaries, one of which
is NCPS, have a valid arbitration program (known as the Nabors Dispute
Resolution Program or “DRP”) which requires that disputes involving injuries to
employees that are incurred during the course and scope of employment be
1
See Exhibit “A,” Order Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration.
submitted to final and binding arbitration. Appellees acknowledged and accepted
the terms of the DRP as a condition of their employment with NCPS.
3. The DRP applies to all direct and indirect subsidiaries of Nabors, all
current and former employees of the aforementioned subsidiaries, and any
“Electing Entity” that has agreed to be bound by the terms of the agreement. Penn
Virginia is an “Electing Entity” and agreed on more than one occasion to be bound
by the terms of the DRP, first in a 2008 drilling contract and later in a 2010 drilling
contract. In Penn Virginia’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Abate, Penn
Virginia argued that Appellee’s individual claims fall within the scope of the DRP,
as both were employees of NCPS at the time of the incident and both allege that
their injuries occurred while in the course and scope of their employment.2
Because Penn Virginia is an Electing Entity to the Nabors DRP, Appellees’ claims
against Penn Virginia fall within the scope of the arbitration provisions set forth in
the DRP.
4. On June 18, 2015, Penn Virginia filed its Motion to Compel
Arbitration and Abate. The matter was set for hearing on July 31, 2015 but was
reset for September 11, 2015 after counsel for Appellee’s made requests for
various depositions and additional discovery relating to the arbitration agreement.
2
See “Exhibit B,” Motion to Compel Arbitration.
Following the hearing and on September 11, 2015, the trial court issued an Order
denying Penn Virginia’s Motion to Compel Arbitration.
5. On October 1, 2015, Penn Virginia filed a Motion for Reconsideration
of the Court’s Order, and with it attached an Affidavit from Mr. Ernest Nelson,
Vice President of Contracts for Nabors, to address a latent ambiguity raised by the
Court during the hearing. The trial court heard the Motion for Reconsideration on
October 12, 2015, and denied the Reconsideration on that same day.
II. ARGUMENTS & AUTHORITIES
6. Penn Virginia now moves this Court of Appeals for an extension of
time to file its Notice of Appeal in light of the Motion for Reconsideration that was
presented to the Court and denied on October 12, 2015.3
7. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.3 states that “the appellate
court may extend the time to file the notice of appeal if, within 15 days after the
deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party: “(a) files in the trial court the
notice of appeal; and (b) files in the appellate court a motion complying with Rule
10.5(b).”4 Rule 10.5(b)(2) provides the pleading requirements for a motion to
extend time to file a Notice of Appeal. Under Rule 10.5(b)(2), appellant must
3
See “Exhibit C,” Motion for Reconsideration and “Exhibit D,” Order Denying Motion for
Reconsideration.
4
See Exhibit “E,” a File Stamped Copy of Penn Virginia’s Notice of Appeal, which was filed
with the trial court on October 13, 2015.
provide the deadline for filing “the item in question;” (in this case, the Notice of
Appeal); “the facts relied on to reasonably explain the need for an extension;”
identification of the trial court, “the date of the trial court’s judgment or appealable
order, and the case number and style of the case in trial court.”
8. In this instance, Penn Virginia’s deadline to file the Notice of Appeal
would have been twenty days from September 11, 2015, pursuant to Texas Rule of
Appellate Procedure 28.1. Twenty days from September 11, 2015 was October 1,
2015. If this Motion is granted, the extended deadline will fall on October 16,
2015. There have been no other requests for extension of time to file this Notice of
Appeal. The trial court’s judgment or appealable order was entered on September
11, 2015, and the case number and style of the case in the trial court is as follows:
Cause No. 2014-42519, Alfredo De La Garza, Individually and as Next Friend for
xxxxxx xx xx xxxxx and xxxxxxxx xx xx xxxxx, minors v. Penn Virginia Oil & Gas,
L.P., Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, L.L.C., Mike Ferguson, Trifecta Oilfield
Services, L.L.C., Cudd Pressure Control, Inc., Roywell Services, Inc., and Oaks
Personnel Services, Inc. d/b/a The Oaks Group.5
9. The facts relied on to explain the need for an extension include the
following:
5
It is relevant to note that Appellees non-suited all defendants but for Penn Virginia and the
Penn Virginia Company Man, Mike Ferguson.
- At the September 11, 2015 hearing, the Court noted that it would deny
the Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Abate because the contracts
entered into between Penn Virginia and Nabors in which Penn Virginia
became an Electing Entity to the Nabors DRP contemplated application
to “past and present” employees. The trial court reasoned that because
neither of the Appellees were past or present employees of NCPS at the
time the contracts were entered into, Penn Virginia’s status as an Electing
Entity did not apply to the dispute between Appellees and Penn Virginia,
and therefore the DRP did not apply.
- On October 1, 2015, Penn Virginia filed a Motion for Reconsideration in
which it presented the Affidavit of Ernest Nelson who, as set forth above,
is the Vice President of Contracts for Nabors. Mr. Nelson entered into
one of the contracts with Penn Virginia on behalf of Nabors and has
personal knowledge as to the intent of Nabors when it prepared the
agreements.
- In the Motion for Reconsideration, Penn Virginia argues that the
language providing that “Penn Virginia is an Electing Entity as to all
disputes with ‘present and former employees and applicants of Nabors,’”
must be read to mean that Penn Virginia is an Electing Entity “as to all
disputes involving present and former employees at the time the dispute
arises,” and not at the time the contract was entered into. In other words,
“Penn Virginia’s status as an Electing Entity is not limited to present and
former employees as of 2008 or 2010” (the time the underlying contracts
were entered into) but instead “applies as to all persons who are present
Nabors employees or former Nabors employees at the time of the
dispute.”
- In this case, the dispute arose between Penn Virginia and Appellees on
April 29, 2014, at which time both injured parties were NCPS employees.
Because Penn Virginia became an Electing Entity to the Nabors Dispute
Resolution Program in 2008 and again in 2010, the DRP applies as to the
dispute between Penn Virginia and Appellees.
- Counsel for Penn Virginia mistakenly believed that the deadline to file its
Notice of Appeal from the Order denying the Motion to Compel
Arbitration was thirty days from September 11, 2015. Counsel
determined after the actual deadline had passed that the appealable Order
was an accelerated appeal and that Penn Virginia in fact had twenty days
from the date of the September 11, 2015 Order. Penn Virginia now files
its Notice of Appeal and this Motion to Extend the Deadline to file its
Notice of Appeal by fifteen days from October 1, 2015.
10. The failure to file a Notice of Appeal on October 1, 2015 was not
deliberate or done in attempt to circumvent the Texas Rules. Counsel for Penn
Virginia had a good faith belief that the deadline to file its Notice of Appeal of the
Order denying the Motion to Compel Arbitration fell thirty days from the date of
the September 11, 2015 Order, pursuant to Rule 26.1. Thus, counsel believed that
the deadline to file was October 12, 2015 (as October 11, 2015 fell on a Sunday).
In light of counsel’s erroneous understanding of the deadline, it was Penn
Virginia’s belief that it could file the Motion for Reconsideration, proceed to oral
argument on the morning of October 12, 2015, and immediately and timely file the
Notice of Appeal from the original September 11, 2015 judgment if the Court then
denied the Motion for Reconsideration.
11. In actuality, an appeal from an Order denying a Motion to Compel
Arbitration is, pursuant to Rule 28.1(a), an accelerated appeal, which permits only
twenty days to file the Notice of Appeal. Following counsel’s research as to
available remedies, Penn Virginia has made all available and good faith efforts to
seek an extension under Rule 10.5(b)(2) to file its Notice of Appeal.
12. Before counsel became aware of the actual and correct deadline,
counsel believed it was in Penn Virginia’s best interest to allow the trial court to
consider the Affidavit of Ernest Nelson and evaluate the Motion for
Reconsideration before the Notice of Appeal was filed. Counsel further believed
(in error) that the “thirty day deadline” would permit the trial court to review the
Motion for Reconsideration and evaluate the Affidavit presented prior to divesting
the trial court of its jurisdiction. Given the trial court’s expression of concern at the
September 11, 2015 hearing as to the “ambiguity” set forth above, Penn Virginia
believed that the Motion for Reconsideration might resolve the issues the trial
court took with the Motion to Compel Arbitration and that, if not, the Notice of
Appeal could be timely filed immediately following the October 12 hearing.
13. Penn Virginia should be permitted to pursue its appeal and would
request that this Court of Appeals exercise its discretionary authority to allow Penn
Virginia to file its Notice of Appeal within fifteen days after the October 1, 2015
deadline. As this Court is no doubt aware, there is a strong presumption in Texas
favoring arbitration. See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 121 S. Ct. 1302 (2001);
Cantella & Co. v. Goodwin, 924 S.W.2d 943 (Tex. 1996); Jack B. Anglin v. Tipps,
842 S.W.2d 266, 268 (Tex. 1992). If a valid arbitration agreement exists, and the
claims are within the agreement’s scope, a trial court has no discretion and must
compel arbitration. Cantella, 924 S.W.2d at 944; Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc. v.
Kilgore, 871 S.W.2d 925, 928 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi, 1994, orig.
proceeding).
14. Penn Virginia did not deliberately, strategically, or intentionally delay
in filing its Notice of Appeal in an effort to subvert the Texas Rules of Appellate
Procedure or engage in any gamesmanship with the trial court. Instead, counsel for
Penn Virginia mistakenly believed the deadline to file its Notice of Appeal fell on
October 12, 2015 rather than October 1, 2015. Penn Virginia believed that, with
the thirty-day deadline, it would have the opportunity to address the trial court’s
specific concerns as to a particular and nuanced ambiguity in the contracts between
Penn Virginia and Nabors. Penn Virginia should not be penalized for the errors
made by its counsel and would request the opportunity to litigate the issues set
forth in its Motion to Compel Arbitration, particularly the application of the
arbitration provisions set forth in the Nabors DRP.
PRAYER
Accordingly, Appellants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC and Penn
Virginia Oil & Gas, L.P. pray that this Court grant this Motion to Extend the
Deadline to File a Notice of Appeal and permit Penn Virginia to present to this Court
its arguments and authorities in support of arbitration. Penn Virginia further prays for
such other and further relief, both special and general, at law and in equity, to which it
may be justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Thomas J. Smith
Thomas J. Smith
State Bar No. 00788934
tsmith@gallowayjohnson.com
Kelly C. Hartmann
State Bar No. 24055631
khartmann@gallowayjohnson.com
Alexis B. Hester
State Bar No. 24072807
ahester@gallowayjohnson.com
GALLOWAY, JOHNSON, TOMPKINS
BURR & SMITH
1301 McKinney, Suite 1400
Houston, Texas 77010
(713) 599-0700
(713) 599-0777 – facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS, PENN
VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, LLC AND
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P.
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
As required by Tex. R. App. P. 10.1(a)(5), I certify that I have conferred
with counsel for Appellees, both of whom indicated that they are opposed to this
Motion.
/s/ Kelly C. Hartmann__________
Kelly C. Hartmann
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that, in accordance with Rule 9.5 of the Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure, I have served the foregoing document upon the following
attorneys by electronic service, personal mail, by commercial delivery service or
by fax on October 14, 2015:
John David Hart J. Javier Gutierrez
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN DAVID HART Ana Laura Gutierrez
Wells Fargo Tower THE GUTIERREZ LAW FIRM, INC.
201 Main Street, Suite 1720 700 East Third Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Alice, Texas 78332
Phone 817-870-2102 Phone 361-664-7377
Fax 817-332-5858 Fax 361-664-7245
Counsel for Appellee, Alfredo Counsel for Appellee, John Paul
De La Garza and his minor children Adame and his minor children,
and Intervenor, Ernesto Gonzalez, Jr.
/s/ Kelly C. Hartmann
Kelly C. Hartmann
NO.
COURT OF APPEALS
HOUSTON' TEXAS
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, L.L.C. & PENN VIRGINIA OIL AND
GAS L.P., Appellants.
v.
ALF'REDO DE LA GARZA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT OF' F'RIEND
MINORS
&
JOHN PAUL AD INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT OF FRIEND OF
AND
MTNORS,
Appellees.
On Appeal from the 215rH Judicial District Court,
Harris County, Texas
Cause No. 2014-42519
Vnnrrrc¡,TroN oF Tnonn¿,s J. Snnrrn
STATE OF TEXAS $
$
COUNTY OF HARRIS $
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority on this day personally appeared Thomas J.
Smith, who after being duly swom upon his oath stated as f'ollows:
1. "My name is Thomas J. Smith. I am over twenty-one (21) years of age. I arn of
sound mind and in all ways competent to make this affidavit and verification,
2. I am one of the attomeys of record for Defendants, Perur Virginia Oil & Gas, L.P.
and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated in this
affidavit and those facts are true and correct.
3. I have reviewed the foregoing Motion for Extension of Time to Fil of
Appeal. In my personal knowledge, the Motion truly and correctly recites allegations
set forth in the pleading,"
Smifh
STIBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me a notary public, which witness my hand
ffiuV of October, 201 5
and seal of this office this
1n and for the State Texas
ROSYN S, MORGAN
NolÕry Puþlic, Slole ol lexos
Mv Cornmrssron Explres
JulY 30, 20.l I
r-l
CAUSE NO. 2014-42519
tfn'ç
Pfrlt tl
ALFREDO DE LA GARZA, $ IN TIIE DISTRICT COURT OX'
ASNEXT Ì'RIEND $
FOR and $
tnlnors $
$
v $ IIARRIS COUNTY,TEXAS
$
PEI\N VIRGINIA OIL & cAS, L.P., PEI\N $
yIRGTNIA OIL & cAS cP LLC,
$
MIKE X'DRGUSON, TRIX'ECTA OILFIELn $
SERVICES, LLC, CUDD PRESSURE $
CONTROL,INC., ROYWELL $ 215th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
SERVICES, INC., and OAKS PERSOII¡IEL $
SERVICES, INC. d/b/a TIIE OAKS GROUP $
ORDER DEI\¡-YING DEFENDA¡ITS, PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P. AND PENN
VIRGIMA OIL & GA.S GP LLC'S MOTION TO COIVIPEL ARBITRATION AND TO
ABATE
On ll# day of STt^! .2015, came to be considered Defendants, Penn
Virginia Oil & Gas, L,P. and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP.LLC's Motion to Compel A¡bitration
and to Abate. After considering the motion and hearing the arguments of counsel, this Court is of
the opinionthatthe Motion shouldbe DENIE?
Fe¡g$cen
"ttd
nefgtrdurt.Qgj<* Pc¡sorulet Serv'ecs¡ he .l/h/e Tbe lì@
qr
o .
0
bo
(d
À
t-.
O'
rt
F'HL&:Ð
Ghris Daniel V.t-
o\
q Distrlct Clerk
SIGNED this day of 2015
---\D-"-'-t
\n
å->
ãËt
SEP I
#
ry6
Få'ff: H.
ELEEì JUDGE, 2 I 5TI{ DISTRICT COURT
ffie
HEE
' Ë<8
cr: rú
6E
ôG
rË
'Ë
order Denying Defendants, Penn virginia oil & Gaq L.P. and Penn Virginia oil & Gas Gp LLC's Page I ofl
O¡ Motion to Compel Arbiüation and to Abate
U
EXHIBIT "A"
oç
I, Chris Daniel, District Clerk of Harris
County, Texas certify that this ís a true and
correct copy ofthe original record filed and or
recorded in my office, elechonically or hard
copy, as it appears on this date.
'Witness
my official hand and seal of office
this October 13.2015
Certified Document Number: 66994917 Totp! Pages: I
t^Lø¿r¿
Chris Daniel, DISTRICT CLERK
IIARRIS COUNÏY, TEXAS
In accordance with Texas Govcrnment Code 406.013 electronically transmitted authenticated
documents are valid. If there is a question regarding the validify of this document and or seal
please e-mail support@hcdistrictclerk.com
6/1 8/2015 4:58:00 PM
Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County
Envelope No. 5739243
By: <<Name>>
Filed: 6/1 8/201 5 4:58:00 PM
CAUSE NO. 2014-42519
ALFREDO DE LA GARZA, $ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
INDIVIDUALLY and AS NEXT FRIEND $
FOR A and $
, mlnors $
$
v $ HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
$
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P., $
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, LLC, $
MIKE FERGUSON, TRIFECTA $
OILFIELD SERVICES, LLC, CITDD $
PRES SURE CONTROL, [NIC., $
ROYWELL SERVICES,INC. and OAKS $
PERSONNEL SERVICES, INC. d/b/A $
THE OAKS GROUP $ 281ST ruDICIAL DISTRICT
DEFENDANTS, PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P. AND PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS
GP. LLC'S MOTION TO COMPEI , ARRITRATION AND TO ARATE
Defendants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, L.P. and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC
(collectively referred to hereinafter as "Penn Virginia" unless individual reference is necessary)
file this Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Abate pending such arbitration. In support thereof,
Penn Virginia would show as follows:
I.INTRODUCTION
l. Plaintiff, Alfredo "Freddie" De La Garza ("Plaintiff' or "De La Garza"),
Individually and as Next Friend of and , and
Intervenor, John Paul "J.P." Adame ("Adame"), Individually and as Next Friend of
, (collectively "the parties") filed
personal injury claims against Penn Virginia on Jruly 24, 2014 and, November 6, 2014,
respectively. Their claims arise out of an April 29,2014 incident, which occurred at a well site
EXHIBIT "B''
located near Shiner, Texas while De La Garua and Adame were working in the course and scope
of their employment with Nabors Completion & Production Co. ("NCPS").
2. Nabors Industries, Inc. ("Nabors") and its subsidiaries, one of which is NCPS,
have a valid arbitration agreement which requires that disputes involving injuries to employees
that are incurred during the course and scope of employment be submitted to final and binding
arbitration. De La Garza and Adame both acknowledged and accepted the terms of the
arbitration agreement.
3. The arbitration agreement applies to all direct and indirect subsidiaries of Nabors,
all current and former employees of the aforementioned subsidiaries, and any "Electing Entity"
that has agreed to be bound by the terms of the agreement.r Penn Virginia is an "Electing Entity"
and has agreed on more than one occasion to be bound by the terms of the agreement.2 De La
Garza's and Adame's individual claims fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement as both
were employees of NCPS at the time of the incident and allege that their injuries occurred while
in the course and scope of their employment. De La Garza and Adame also filed claims as
representatives of their minor children. The minors' claims are also subject to the arbitration
agreement as they are derivative of De La Garza and Adame's claims. Consequently, De La
Garza and Adame's individual claims against Penn Virginia and the claims filed on behalf of
their minor children all fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
4. Therefore, Penn Virginia's Motion to Compel Arbitration should be granted, and
this case should be abated or dismissed and compelled to final and binding arbitration.
I See Nabors Dispute Resolution Program ("DRP'), a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit l-4.
2
See 2008 Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, LP IADC Contract, a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1-
B; see also Contractors Special Proyisions, a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1-C, at I 16
"Operator, its parent, subsidiary and affiliated corporations, as well as the employees, officers and directors ofeach
(collectively, "Operator") is cognizant of the Nabors Dispute Resolution Program and wishes to become an Electing
Entity, as defined in that Program." See also 2010 Penn Virginia MC Energy, LLC IADC Contract, a true and
correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit l-D; see also Contractors Specíøl Provisions, a true and correct copy of
which is attached as Exhibit 1-E, at fl 16.
II.I.INDISPUTED FACTS
5. Nabors is the "Sponsor" of the Nabors Dispute Resolution Program (ooDRP"), as
that term is defined by the DRP.3
6. The DRP is subject to the Federal Arbitration Act ("FA"{").4
7. By its terms, the Nabors DRP is designed to provide a means for the resolution of
disputes between the "Company" and the Company's present and former employees that are
related to or that arise out of a current or former employment relationship with the Company.s
8. The DRP is intended to create an exclusive procedural mechanism for the final
resolution of all disputes falling within its terms.6 Consequently, the DRP requires that all
disputes between De La Garza, Adame and the Company are subject to binding arbitration.T
9. The DRP defines "Dispute" to include personal injuries that are incurred at the
worþlace or in the course and scope of employment.s
10. The DRP defines "Company" as "Sponsor and every direct and indirect
subsidiary...ofSponsor,@',,9Aspreviouslymentioned,Naborsisthe
3 Al/idavit of Keith Nicholson ("Nicholson Alf."), a true and coraect copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1, atl4;
see also Exhibit I -4, at fl 2(L).
a SeeExhibit 1-A at
fl fl 2(C) and 8. The Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $ 2, applies in state courts and preempts
state anti-arbitration laws to the contrary. Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 121 S.Ct. 1302; Southland Corp v.
Keating, 465 U.S. 1, 16 (1984); see also Palm Harbor Homes v. McCoy, 944 S.W.2d 716, 721 (Tex. App.-Fort
Worth 1997) (holding that FAA preempted Texas Arbitratìon Act's requirement that party's attorney sign
agreement). Although the FAA preempts state arbitration laws, courts still must resort to general state law contract
principles to determine whether an arbitration agreement will be enforced.
5,Se¿ Exhibit l-4, at fl L
6 See Exhibit l-4, at fl l.
7.See Exhibit l-4.
8 "Dispute" means all legal and equitable claims, demand and controversies, of whatever nature or kind, whether in
contract, tort, under statute or regulation, or some other law, between persons bound by the Program or by an
agreement to resolve Disputes under the Program, or between a person bound by the Program and a person or entity
otherwise entitled to its benefits, including, but not limited to, any matters with respect to...6. any personal ínjury
allegedly incurred in or about a Company l{orkpløce or ìn the course and scope oføn Employee's employment.
See Exhibit 1-A at tf 2(E) (emphasis added).
e
See Exhibit l-A at !f 2(D) (emphasis added).
"Sponsor" of the DRP. NCPS, De La Garza and Adame's employer at the time of the worþlace
incident, is a subsidiary of Nabors.r0 The DRP extends to and includes employees of NCPS.Ir
11. Further, Penn Virginia is an "Electing Entity" and agreed to be bound by the
terms of the DRP in two IADC Conhacts between it and Nabors.l2 As an "Electing Entity," Penn
Virginia is required to resolve disputes with any past or present employee(s) or applicants of
Nabors in accordance with the DRP.I3
12. On January 2, 2013, Adame executed a document entitled "Application For
Hourly And Daily Employment," as well as another document entitled "Notice to Applicants
Regarding Dispute Resolution Program."l4 Likewise, on July 16,2013, De La Garza executed
the "Application For Hourly And Daily Employment" and the "Notice to Applicants Regarding
Dispute Resolution Program."l5 De La Gana and Adame, by their signatures, acknowledged and
agreed that they would be "required to adhere to the Dispute Resolution Program and its
requirement for submission of all claims to...arbitration."l6
13. On January 7,2013, Adame also executed a document entitled "Employee
Acknowledgement Concerning Nabors Dispute Resolution Program."lT The document
specifically states, "I have received a copy of the Nabors Dispute Resolution Program."l8 De La
Garza executed the same document on July 22, 20l3.re De La Garza and Adame, by their
to See Nicholson Aff. atl 6.
tt See Nicholson Aff. atl6; see also Affidavit oJ Katherine Ryan, a true and corect copy of which attached as
Exhibit 2.
t2 See Nicholson Aff, at\l7 through 9; see ølso Exhibits 1-B and l-D; see a/so Exhibits 1-C and 1-E, at t[ 16.
t3 See Nicholson Af,f. atl 10; see also Exhibits 1-B - I -G.
ta See Nicholson Aff. atl 12; see also Exhibit 1-F.
ts See Nicholson Aff. at\ 16; see also Exhibit 1-G.
t6 See Nicholson Aff. atll 12 and 16; see also Exhibit I -F and 1 -G.
t7 Nicholson Aff. at\ 13; see also Exhibit I -H.
ts Nicholson Aff. at
fl 13; see also Exhibit l-H.
te NicholsonAff. atllT;see also Exhibit 1-I.
signatures, again acknowledged and agreed that they would be "required to adhere to the Dispute
Resolution Program and its requirement for submission of all claims to...arbitration."2O
14. On April 29,2003, Adame was hired by Nabors Well Services, Ltd. as a crew
worker.2l On January 7 ,2013, as a result of a business reorganization, he became a crew worker
for NCPS when Nabors V/ell Services, Ltd. liquidated into Nabors V/ell Services, Co., which
liquidated and dissolved into NCPS.22 As a crew worker, Adame's job duties and responsibilities
included the operation of hand and power tools to perform maintenance and repairs to oil or gas
wells and related equipment. Adame's job duties also involved activities associated with rigging-
up and rigging-down workover rigs, pulling levers or turning handles to extend hydraulic or
screw-type jacks to support and level the rig, laying steel production rods, tubing, and casing,
and other tasks necessary to support operations.23 Adame's job duties and responsibilities did not
include the movement of goods in interstate commerce.2a While employed by NCPS, Adame was
never employed as a commercial truck driver or transportation worker.25
15. On July 22,2013, De La Garza was hired by NCPS as a crew worker.26 As a crew
worker, De La Garza'sjob duties and responsibilities included the operation of hand and power
tools to perform maintenance and repairs to oil or gas wells and related equipment. De La
Garza's job duties also involved activities associated with rigging-up and rigging-down
workover rigs, pulling levers or turning handles to extend hydraulic or screw-type jacks to
support and level the rig, laying steel production rods, tubing, and casing, and other tasks
necessary to support operations.2T DeLaGarza'sjob duties and responsibilities did not include
20
Nicholson Alf. atll 13 and,17; see also Exhibit l-E.
2t Nicholson Aff. at \ 14.
22
NicholsonAff. atfl 14.
23
Nicholson Aff. at fl 14.
24
Id.
2s Id.
26
Nicholson Aff, at tf 18.
27
Nicholson Aff atl 18.
the movement of goods in interstate commerce.2s While employed by NCPS, De La Garza was
never employed as a commercial truck driver or transportation worker.2e
L6. On July 24, 2014, De La Garza filed his Original Petition, and on September 8,
2014 and October l, 2014, De La Garza filed his First and Second Amended Petitions.30
Likewise, on November 6, 2014 and February 19, 2015, Adame filed his Original and First
Amended Petitions in Intervention.3l A copy of all pleadings are maintained in the Court's
records. De La Garza and Adame allege that on April 29, 2014 and while working for NCPS,
they were injured when a piece of NCPS line pipe parted, causing both to be thrown back as a
result ofthe released pressurized gas.32
III. SUMMARY OF'THE ARGUMENT
17. The Company (defined to include Nabors, its subsidiaries, and any "Electing
Entity") has a valid arbitration agreement, which both De La Garza and Adame acknowledged
and accepted. Because Penn Virginia is an "Electing Entity," the parties' claims against Penn
Virginia fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement. Consequently, the parties' claims
must be submitted to final and binding arbitration in accordance with the DRP. Therefore, Penn
Virginia's Motion to Compel Arbitration should be granted and this case should be abated.
IV. ARGUMENT & AUTHORITIES
18. Pursuant to the DRP, the parties' lawsuit must be submitted to binding arbitration.
It is undisputed that Texas courts recognize that arbitration agreements in an "at-will"
employment setting apply to personal injury claims. In fact, there is a strong presumption in
Texas favoring arbitration. See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 121 S. Ct. 1302 (2001);
28
Id.
2e
Id.
30 Plaintiffls Original Petition, First Amended Petition, and Second Amended Petition.
3rAdame's Original Petition in Intervention and First Amended Petition in Intervention.
32SeePlaintifls Original Petition and First Amended Petition, as well as Adame's Original Petition in Intervention
and First Amended Petition in Intervention.
Cantella & Co. v. Goodwin, 924 S.W.2d,943 (Tex. 1996); Jack B. Anglin v. Tipps,842 S.W.2d
266, 268 (Tex. 1992). If a valid arbitration agreement exists, and the claims are within the
agreement's scope, atrial cout has no discretion and must compel arbitration. Cantella,924
S.V/.2d at 944; Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc. v. Kilgore, 871 S.V/.2d 925,928 (Tex. App.-
Corpus Christi, 1994, orig. proceeding).
19. The clear language of the DRP states that the Federal Arbitration Act,9 U.S.C. $
1, et. seq. ("FAJA.") controls.33 The Texas Supreme Court has held that in cases where the FAA
is stated in the agreement as the controlling law, the FAA prevails. EZ Pawn Corp. v. Mancias,
934 S.W.2d 87,91 (Tex. 1996). In adjudicating a motion to compel arbitration under the FAA,
courts generally try to determine whether the parties agreed to arbitrate the dispute in question.
Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614, 626 (1985); Folse v.
Richard Wolf Medical Instruments Corp., 56 F.3d 603, 605 (5th Cir. 1995); R.M. Perez &
Assocs., Inc. v. Welch, 960F.2d 534, 538 (5th Cir. 1992).
20. Under the FAA, the court applies ordinary state contract law principles in order to
decide whether a valid arbitration agreement exists. See In re D. Wilson Constr. Co., 196 S.V/.3d
774,781 (Tex. 2006) (citing First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938, 944
(1995)); 9 U.S.C.A. $ 1 et seq.; Crv. Pnec. & R¡v. Coon $ 171.001 et seq. Once a valid
arbitration agreement is established, a presumption attaches favoring arbitration. Dallas
Cardiologt Assoc., P.A. v. Mallick,978 S.V/.2d 209,212 (Tex. App.-Dallas, 1998, pet. denied).
Then Court must then determine whether the arbitration agreement covers the non-movant's
claims. In re Jim Walter Homes, lnc.,207 S.W.3d 888 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2006).
In doing so, a court must focus on the complaint's factual allegations rather than the legal causes
of action asserted. Id.
33 S¿¿ Exhibit l-A at !f fl 2(C) and 8
21. Thus, two questions guide the determination of whether Penn Virginia's Motion
to Compel should be granted: 1) is there a valid agreement to arbitrate; and2) does the dispute in
question fall within the scope of the agreement? Associated Glass, Ltd. v. Eye Ten Oaks Invs.,
Ltd., 147 S.W.3d 507,511 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2004,no pet.).
A. Valid Agreement to Arbitrate
22. An "at-will" employee who receives notice of an employer's arbitration policy
and continues or commences employment accepts the terms of the agreement as a matter of law.
See In re Halliburton, S0 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. 2002); In re Dallas Peterbilt, Ltd., L.L.P., 1.96
S.\M.3d 761, 162 (Tex. 2006). In Halliburton, the employer created a dispute resolution program
which obligated both employees and the employer to arbitrate all disputes between them. See
Halliburton, 80 S.W.3d at 566. The Texas Supreme Court held that the employer was justified
in giving notice to all employees of the program and informing them that by continuing to work
after the adoption of the program, employees would be considered to have accepted the program.
See id at 569-71.
23. Four years later, the San Antonio Court of Appeals extended Halliburton even
further. Relying on Halliburton, the Fourth Court of Appeals compelled arbitration where the
employee expressly refused to sign an arbitration agreement but continued to work after
receivingnoticeofthearbit¡ationrequirement. InrefuRGT,Inc.,2006WL622736 (Tex.App.-
San Antonio 2006, orig. proceeding).
24. It should also be noted that the San Antonio Court of Appeals has specifically
considered the Nabors DRP and held that it is valid and enforceable on multiple occasions. See
NDUSA USA, LP v. Pena, 385 S.V/.3d 103 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2012, pet. denied);
NDUSA USA, LP v. Carpenter, 198 S.V/.3d 240,249 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2006, orig.
proceeding). Furthermore, in October 2013 and, then again in December 2013, the Texas
Supreme Court denied the family of a deceased Nabors' employee's petition for review when the
family sought to reverse the Fourth Court of Appeals' determination that the DRP was valid and
enforceable. See Pena,385 S.ïi/.3d 103
25. De La Garza and Adame executed documents on several occasions that clearly
express both parties' agreement to the terms of the DRP.3a The documents specifically state that
De La Garza and Adame acknowledged receiving, reviewing, understanding, and accepting the
DRP's requirement to submit disputes to arbitration.3s De LaGarza and Adame's signatures on
the aforementioned documents is strong evidence of their actual acknowledgment and agreement
that they are required to adhere to the DRP. See In re Bunzl USA,l55 S.W.3d 202 (Tex. App.-
El Paso 2004, orig. proceeding).
26. De La Garza and Adame accepted the terms of the DRP as a matter of law.
Therefore, a valid and enforceable agreement to arbitrate was formed. In re Pqlm Harbor
Homes, Inc.,l95 S.V/.3d 672,676 (Tex. 2006).
B. The Dispute Falls Within the Scope of the Aereement
21. The parties' claims fall within the scope of the DRP. The DRP requires that
disputes between the Company (defined as Nabors, its subsidiaries, and any "Electing Entity")
and its current or former employees be submitted to arbitration. According to the parties'
Petitions, De La Gana and Adame were both employees of a Nabors' subsidiary (NCPS) and
both were allegedly injured while in the course and scope of their employment. Consequently,
this dispute, which is between NCPS employees and Penn Virginia (an "Electing Entity"), falls
within the scope of the agreement.
3a SeeNicholsonAff. atfl\12, 13,16,andl7;see also Exhibits 1-F- 1-I.
35
Nichols on Aff. at I I 12, 13, I 6, and 17 ; see also Exhibits -F - 1-I.
1
28. Whether a claim falls within the scope of an arbitration agreement depends on the
factual allegations of the complaint rather than the legal causes of action asserted. Prudential
Secs., Inc. v. Marshall,909 S.V/.2d 896, 899 (Tex. 1995); Ikon Of/ìce Solutions, Inc. v. Eifert,2
S.W.3d 688, 697 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding); Prudentiøl-Bache
Secs., Inc. v. Garza, 848 S.V/.2d 803, 807 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 1993). Based on the
factual allegations contained in the parlies' pleadings, the parties' claims fall squarely within the
scope of the DRP.
29. It is undisputed that De La Garza and Adame were employed by NCPS, which is
a Nabors subsidiary.36 It is undisputed that La Garza and Adame both alleged that they were
injured at the worþlace and/or in the course and scope of their employment.3T
30. De La Garza and Adame signed an acknowledgement that specifically states, "I
have received a copy of the Nabors Dispute Resolution Program...and understand that I am
required to adhere to the Dispute Resolution Program and its requirement for submission of
disputes to...arbitration."38 All of these terms are clearly defined in the DRP.
31. The DRP clearly and unequivocally states that it "applies to and binds the
Company, each Employee and Applicant."3e The DRP defines "Dispute" to include any personal
injury that is incurred at the worþlace or in the course and scope of employment.aO According
to the DRP, "Company" means "Sponsor and every direct and indirect subsidiary...of Sponsor,
(and) any Electing Entity."al
36 Nicholson Aff. atl T 6, 11 through 151, see also Plaintiffs Original Petition and First Amended Petition, and
Adame's Original Petition in Intervention and First Amended Petition in Intervention.
37 ,See Plaintiffs Original Petition and First Amended Petition and Adame's Original Petition in Intervention and
First Amended Petition in Intervention.
38
Nicholson Aff atll l3 and l6; see also Exhibits l-H and l-I (emphasis added).
3e,S¿e Exhibit l-4, at !f l.
ao Exhibit 1-A at tf 2(E).
See
ar ,See Exhibit l-A at 2(D).
!f
32. Nabors is the "sponsor" of the DRP.a2 NCPS is a subsidiary of Nabors.a3 Penn
Virginia is an "Electing Entity" and agreed that it is bound by the terms of the DRP.44 Therefore,
Penn Virginia falls within the scope of the "Company."
33. The parties' claims clearly fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
Consequently, Penn Virginia's Motion to Compel Arbitration should be granted and this case
should be abated or dismissed and compelled to final and binding arbitration.
V. CONCLUSION
34. Nabors has instituted a comprehensive dispute resolution program, which requires
arbitration of disputes between the Company (which is defined as Nabors Industries, Inc., its
subsidiaries, and any "Electing Entity") and current or former employees. De La Garza and
Adame unequivocally agreed to adhere to the DRP and its requirement to submit all claims to
arbitration. The DRP applies to personal injuries that occur at the workplace or while the
employee is in the course and scope of his employment. Therefore, the parties' claims, as
asserted in this lawsuit, are subject to the terms of the DRP. Consequently, Penn Virginia's
Motion to Compel Arbitration should be granted and this case should be abated or dismissed and
compelled to final and binding arbitration.
PRAYER
For the foregoing reasons, PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P. and PENN VIRGINIA
OIL & GAS GP, LLC request that the Court grant this Motion, abate or dismiss this action, and
order that the claims asserted by Alfredo De La Garza,Individually and as Next Friend of
a, and Intervenor, John Paul Adame, Individually and as
Next Friend of be
a2
Nicholson Aff, at\ 4; see also Exhibit l-4, at !J 2(L).
43Nicholson Aff. atl 6.
4 See Nicholson Aff. atll7 through l0; see also Exhibits l-C and l-F,, at Contractors Special Provisions,fllí.
compelled to final and binding arbitration. PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS, L.P. and PENN
VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, LLC further request all other relief to which they are entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Thomas J. Smith
Thomas J. Smith
State Bar No. 00788934
tsmith@gallowayj ohnson. com
Kelly C. Hartmann
State Bar No. 24055631
khartmarn@gall owayj ohn son. com
Alexis B. Hester
State Bar No.24072807
ahester @gallowayj ohnson. com
Ge[owey, JoFTNSoN, Tolr¿prrNs
Bunn & SurrH
l30l McKinney, Suite 1400
Houston, Texas 77010
(713) s99-0700
(7 1 3) 599-07 77 - facsimile
Attorneys for Defendants, Penn VirgÍnÍa
OÍ1& Gaso L.P. and Penn VÍrgÍnÍa OÍI8t
Gas GP, LLC
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certi$ that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served
electronically, by and through the Court approved electronic filing manager, to participating
parties on this 18th day of June 2015, as follows:
John David Hart J. Javier Gutierrez
L.rw Ornrcns OF JonN D¿,vrn H¿,nr Ana Laura Gutierrez
Wells Fargo Tower Tnn GurrrRREz LAw Frnu,Inc.
201 Main Street, Suite 1720 700 East Third Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Alice, Texas 78332
Phone 817-870-2102 Phone 361-664-7377
Fax 817-332-5858 Fax 361-664-7245
Coanselfor Plaintiff, Individaally and as Counselfor Intervenor,
Nert Fríend of I John Pøul Adøme, Indivíduølly and øs Next
, Minor Children Fríend of
Benjamin A. Escobar, Jr.
Brit T. Brown
BEIRNE, M.lvNnRn & PlnsoNo L.L.P.
1300 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2500
Houston, Texas 77056
Phone 713-623-0887
Fax 713-960-1527
Counsel for Defendønt, Cudd Pressure
Control, Inc.
/s/ Thomas J. Smith
Thomas J. Smith
CAUSE NO. 2014-42519
ALFREDO DE LA GARZA, $ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
INDIVIDUALLY aTTcl AS NE,XT FRIEND $
FOR $
mlnoïs ç
$
$ HARRIS COI'NTY, TEXAS
$
PENN VIRGINIA OlL & GAS, LP, $
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, LLC, $
MII(E FERGUSON, TRIFECTA $
OILFIELD SERVICES, LLC, CUDD $
PRESSURE CONTROL, INC., $
ROYWELL SERVICES,INC. and OAI(S 6
PERSONNEL SERVICES, lNC, cllb/a $
ST
THE OAKS GROUP $ 28 1 JUDICIAL DISTRICT
VERIFICATION
S'|ATE OF TEXAS {j
$
COUNTY OF HARRIS $
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority on this day personally appeared Thornas J.
Smith, who after being cluly sworn upon his oath stated as follows:
1. "My narne is Thomas J. Srnith. I am over twenty-one (21) years of age. i am of sound
rnind and in all ways competent to make this verification.
2. I am one of the attorneys of record for Dcfcndants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, L,P, and
Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated in this affidavit
and those facts are true and correct.
3. I have revicwcd the foregoing Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Abate this case
pcnding such arbitration. In my personal knowledge, the Motion truly and correctly recites the
fäctual allegations set fortir in the pleadings ancl the evidence in the trial court record."
J
SUBSCRIBED AND SWOI{N TO before me a notary public, which witness my hand
and seal of this office this/ l*day of June, 2015.
Notary Public in and for ofTexas
nHoND^ SCHNltZ
Notory Publlc, Stole ol Toxqs
MyCommlsslon Fxplr€!
Docembor lt,2013
CAUSE NO. 2014-42519
ALFREDO DE LA GARZA, $ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
Y andAs NEXTFRIEND $
and $
$
$
$ HARRIS COLINTY, TEXAS
$
PENN VIRGINIA OTL &. GAS, LP, $
PENN VIRGINIA OIL & GAS GP, LLC, $
MIKE FERGUSON, TRIFECTA $
OILFIELD SERVICES, LLC, CUDD $
PRESSURE CONTROL, INC., $
ROYV/ELL SERVICES, INC. and OAKS $
PERSONNEL SERVTCES, INC. d/b/A $
ST
THE OAKS GROUP $ 28 1 JUDICIAL DISTRICT
AFFIDAVIT OF KNITH NICHOLSON
STATE OF'TEXAS $
$
COUNTY OF HARRIS $
Before me, the unclersigned notary, on this day personally appeared Keith Nicholson, the
afftan6 a person whose identity is known to me. After I administered an oath to affiant, the
affiant testified:
I "My name is Keith Nicholson. I am over l8 years of age, of sound mind, and capable of
making this affidavit. The facts stated in this affidavit are within my personal knowledge
and are true and correct.
2. I am Assistant General Counsel for Nabors Corporate Services, Inc.
J In my capacity as Assistant General Counsel, I am required to be familiar with Nabors
Industries, Inc.'s corporate structure and the relationship of its various subsidiaries and
affiliated companies. I am also required to be familiar with the Nabors Dispute
Resolution Program ("DIUt"¡.
4 Nabors Industries, Inc. is the "Sponsor" of the Nabors DRP as that tem is defined by the
DRP. A true and correct copy of the DRP is attached to my affìdavit as Exhibit 1-4.
5 The DRP provides that it applies to all direct and indirect subsidiaries of Nabors
Inclustries, Inc., as well as all "Electing Entities" that have agreed to be bound by same.
6. Nabors Completion & Production Services Co. ("NCPS") was a subsidiary of Nabors
EXHIBIT "1"
Industries, Inc. at the time of the April 29,2014 incident which makes the basis of the
lawsuit.
7 On Septembet 23,2008, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, LP agreed to be bound by the DRP as
an "Electing Entity" in the "Contractors Special Provisions" contained in the International
Association of Drilling Contractors ("IADC") Drilling Contract between it and Nabors
Drilling USA LP. A true and correct copy of the IADC Contract is attached in its entirety
to my affidavit as Exhibit l-8. The Contractors Special Provisions portion has been
pulled out for reference and is attached as Exhibit 1-C.
8. The Contractors Special Provisions page states at paragraph 16 that "Operator, its parent,
subsidiary, and affiliated corporations,..(collectively "Operator") is cognizant of the
Nabors Dispute Resolution Program and wishes to become an Electing Entity, as defined
in that Program. Accordingly, Operator and Nabors Industries, Inc. ("Nabors") hereby
agree that Operator is an Electing Entity..."
9 In addition, on September 8, 2010, Penn Virginia MC Energy, LLC agreed to be bound
by the DRP as an "Electing Entity" in the "Contractors Special Provisions" contained in
the International Association of Drilling Contractors ("IADC") Drilling Contract between
it and Nabors Drilling USA LP. A true and conect copy of the IADC Contract is attached
in its entirety to my affidavit as Exhibit 1-D. The Contractors Special Provisions portion
has been pulled out for reference and is attached as Exhibit 1-8. lt is my understanding
that Penn Virginia MC Energy, LLC is a subsidiary or affiliated corporation of Penn
Virginia Oil & Gas, LP andlor Penn Virginia Oil & Gas GP, LLC.
10. As an "Electing Entity," Defendants, Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, LP and Penn Virginia Oil
& Gas GP, LLC are required to resolve disputes with any past or present employee(s) or
applicant(s) of Nabors Industries, Inc. or its subsidiaries in accordance with the DRP.
I l. Based upon my review of the personnel file of Mr. Adame, I can confirm that Mr. Adame
was employed by NCPS, and that he executed various documents that acknowledged that
he received, reviewed, and accepted the terms and conditions of the DRP.
t2, Specifically, my review of the relevant documents confirms that on January 2,2013,Mr.
Adame executed a document entitled "Application For Hourly And Daily Employment,"
a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1-F. Mr. Adame acknowledged
and agreed by his signature that he is "required to adhere to the Dispute Resolution
Program and its requirement for submission of all claims to..,arbitration."
l3 Further, on January 7,2013, Mr. Adame executed a document entitled "Employee
Acknowledgement Concerning Nabors Dispute Resolution Program," a true and correct
copy of which is attached as Exhibit l-H. The document specifically states, "I have
received a copy of the Nabors Dispute Resolution Ptogram." Mr, Adame acknowledged
and agreed by his signature that he is "required to adhere to the Dispute Resolution
Program and its requirement for submission of all claims to...arbitration."
t4 Mr. Adame was employed by NCPS as a crew worker. As a crew worker, Mr. Adame's
job duties and responsibilities included the operation of hand and power tools to perform
maintenance and repairs to oil or gas wells and related equipment. Mr. Adame's job
duties also involved activities associated with rigging-up and rigging-down work over
rigs, pulling levers or turning handles to extend hydraulic or screw-type jacks to support
and level the rig, laying steel production rods, tubing, and casing, and other tasks
necessary to support operations. 'While employed by NCPS, Mr. Adame was never a
commercial truck driver or transportation worker.
15. Based upon my review of the personnel file of Mr. Alfredo De La Garza,I can confirm
that Mr'. De La Gana was employed by NCPS, ancl that he executed various documents
that acknowledged that he received, reviewed, and accepted the terms and conditions of
the DRP.
16. Specifically, my review of the relevant documents confirms that on July 16, 2013, Mr. De
La Gana executed a document entitled "Application For Hourly And Daily
Employment," a true and coüect copy of which is attached as Exhibit l-G. By his
signature, Mr. De LaGarza acknowledged and agreed that he is "required to adhere to the
Dispute Resolution Program and its requirement for submission of all claims
to. .. arbitration."
17. Further, on July 22,2013, Mr, De La Garza executed a document entitled "Employee
Acknowledgement Concerning Nabors Dispute Resolution Program," a true and correct
copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1-I. The document specifically states, "I have
received a copy of the Nabors Dispute Resolution Program." Mr. De La Garza
acknowledged and agreed by his signature that he is "required to adhere to the Dispute
Resolution Program and its requirement for submission of all claims to...arbitration."
18 Mr. De LaGarua was employed by NCPS as a crew worker. As a crew worker, Mr. De
La Garza's job duties and responsibilities included the operation of hand and power tools
to perform maintenance and repairs to oil or gas wells and related equipment. Mr. De La
Garza's job duties also involved activities associated with rigging-up and rigging-down
work over rigs, pulling levers or turning handles to extend hydraulic or screw-type jacks
to support and level the rig, laying steel production rods, tubing, and casing, and other
tasks necessary to support operations. Mr. De La Garza'sjob duties and responsibilities
did not include the movement of goods in interstate commerce. While employed by
NCPS, Mr. De LaGarza was never a commercial truck driver or transportation worker.
t9. At all times relevant to this matter, NCPS was engaged in interstate commerce as it was
in the business of providing services for the development of oil and gas resourÇes that are
placed into commerce in both Texas and other states of the United States.
20. On information and belie{ Penn Virginia is also engaged in interstate commerce as it is
in the business of producing oil and gas resources that are placed into commerce in both
Texas and other states of the United States.
21 Attached as Exhibit 1-A to my affidavit is a true and correct copy of Nabors Industries,
Inc.'s DRP booklet, in English and Spanish, respectively. These records are kept by
Nabors Industries, Inc. in the regular course and scope of business, and it was the regular
course of business of Nabors Industries,Ino, for an employee or representative of Nabors
Industries, Inc., with knowledge of the act or event that was recorded, to make these
records or to transmit the information to be included in these records. These records were
made at or near the time or reasonably soon after the act or event that was recorded.
22 Attached as Exhibit i -B to my affrdavit is a true and correct copy of the 2008 IADC
Drilling Contract between Nabors and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas, LP, and attached as
Exhibit l-C is a true and correct copy of the portion of the IADC contract titled
"Contractors Special Provisions." These records are kept by Nabors Industries, Inc. in the
regular course and scope of business, and it was the regular course of business of Nabors
Industries, Inc. for an employee or representative of Nabors Industries, Inc., with
knowledge of the act or event that was recorded, to make these records or to transmit the
information to be included in these records. These records werc madc at or near the time
or reasonably soon after the act or event that was recorded.
23 Attached as Exhibit l-D to my affidavit is a true and conect copy of the 2010 IADC
Drilling Contract between Nabors and Penn Virginia MC Energy, LLC, and attached as
Exhibit l-E is a true and correct copy of the portion of the IADC contract titled
"Contractors Special Provisions." These records are kept by Nabors Industries, Inc. in the
regular course and scope ofbusiness, and it was the regular course ofbusiness ofNabors
Industries, Inc. for an employee or representative of Nabors Industries, Inc., with
knowledge of the act or event that was recorded, to make these records or to transmit the
information to be included in these records. These records were made at or near the time
or reasonably soon after the act or event that was recorded.
24. The records attached as Exhibits 1-F, 1-G, l-H, and 1-I are true and correct copies of
records that are kept by NCPS in the regular course and scope of business, and it was the
regular course of business of NCPS for an employee or representative of NCPS, with
knowledge of the act or event that was recorded, to make these records or to transmit the
information to be included in these records. These records were made at or near the time
the act or event that was recorded."
Sworn to and subscribed before me by on the Éã*of June, 2015.
ú
Notary in and for the ofTexas
MAny D. Hotstilcroil My Commission expires
Notory Publlc, Stote of T6xos
My Commtsrlon Expkês
Moy 05, 20tt
NABORS DISPUTE RESOLUTION
PROGRAM and RULES
Copies thís pamphlet are availahle in S¡sanish, upon
o,.f
rer|u.e st, .fi' o m anj, J$a b or,v s u b s i d i a ry' s Hu il1.c¿lt
Resouvees Deparfinent.
Copías de eslefall.eto esldtt dispontble en espafiol con
solo requeriúas al Depa{lamenfo de Recurso^r
tr,, * "..n n nu
^ Ê;¡HlþlT'¡*fl[ri.,'1. t,
^".
^t^
THE Ì BORS DISPUTE RESOLUTION P} GRAM
1. Purpose and Construction
The Prograrn is designed to pt'ol'ide a means for the quick,
fair, accessible, and inexpensive resolufion of Disputes
between the Company and the Company's
present a¡d fornrer Employees and Applicants for
enrployment , ñated to or arising out of a cürrcnt, forrne¡
or potsntial employment relationship with the Company.
The Prograrn is intended to öreatÉ an exclusive procedural
mechanism for the final ¡esolution of all Disputes falling
within its terms. It is not inlended eitler to abridge or
enlarge substantive rights available under applicable law,
The Program contractually modifies the "at-wili" employ-
mÉnf' relafiunship'"'betq'eet''tlte Company -'and its
Employees, but only to the extent expressly stated in the
Program. The Program should be interpreted in accor-
dance with fhese putposes.
2, I)efïnítions
A. '¿AAA" rüeaüs the Arnerican Arbitration Assosiation,
B. '!JAN{S" means Judiciai Arbitration and Mediation
Servises.
C. The 'oAct" meåns the Federal Arbit¡ation Aot,
9 U.S.C.$1, et seq., as amended frc¡m time to time'
D. "Company" means Sponsor and every direct ot
indiresl subsidiary (wbether a corpotation, lirnited
liability cornpâny, company partnership or other legal
entity) of Sponsor, any Electing Eniity, any entity oi
person alleged to have joint and several liability
concerning aly Dispute, and all of their ditectors,
officers, employees, and agents, every plan ofbene'
fìts, whether or not tax-exempt, established or main-
tained by any such entity, the fiduciaries, agents and
employees of all suct¡ plans, and thç successors and
assigns ofall such entities, plans and persons; provÍd-
ed, however, that in the case of an Electing Entity,
"Company" shall include the Electing Entity oúly tc
the exlent provided in the Electing Entity's agrcement
to Lre borurd by the Prograrn.
E. "Dispute" means ali legal arrd equitable elaims,
demands, a¡d controversies, of whalever nature or
kind, whether in contract, tort, under statufe or regu-
Iation, or sóme other law, between persons bound by
tlre Program or by an agrcement to resolve Disputes
ler the Ptogtam, or between a person i nd by the
Program and a person or entity otherwise entitled to
its benefits, including, but not lirnited to, any
matters wilh respect to:
l. this Program;
2. the employment or polential reemployment of an
Employee, including the terms, conditions, or
termination of such employment with the
Company;
3. employee benefits or incidents of employrnent
with the Company;
4: any 'ofher"matter reiated -to- or çoncerníng^the '- '-
relationship between the Employee and the
Company includÍng, by way of example and
wifhout limitati on, allegations ofi discri¡nination
based on race, sex, religion, national origin, age,
veteran status or disability; sexual or olher kinds
of harassment; workers' compensafion retalia-
tiorr; defanratiorr; infliction of emotional disüess,
ârtitrust claim concenring wages or otherwiso, or
status, claim or membership with regard to any
employee benefit plan;
5. arr Applicant's application for employment and
the Company's actions and decisions regarding
such application; and
6. any personal injury allegedly incuned in or about
a Company worþlace or in the coulse and scope
of an Employee's employmenl
"Dispute" includes all such mattcrs regatdless of
when the çvents on which they are based occurred,
including mattel:s based on events oceurring before
the Employee became subject to this Program (so
long as such disputes were not previously asserted in
a judioial forum) or affer termination of the employ-
ment ¡elationship"
F. "Electing Entity" mearis any legal entity that has
agreed ts be bound by the Program as provided herein.
G. "Etnployee" rneans ¿üy person who is or has been in
the employment of tbe Comparry on or afer the effec-
tive date of this Prograrn, rvhether ot not empltyed af
the rime a claim is brought with respect to a Dispute,
residirrg in the United States, or otherwise subject to
lau,s of the United States or any statÊ, ricipality,
or other polilical subdivision of the Uniteo States,
if, "Applicant" llreâns any person u'ho is seekirrg or has
sought employmont u'ith the Company affer the effec-
tive date of this Program.
I. "Parly" meills, with respect to ¿ patticular Dispute,
affecled pe1'solls a¡dlor' enlities bounci try this
Prograrn,
.1. "Progrårn" lrealls this Nabors Dispute Rcsolurion
Program, as anrended ftotn time to time.
K. "Rules" rneans the Nsbors Dispute Resolution Rttles,
. .as arnencle<l from limelo tinre. rvhich arç atpiiçablejô
mediation and arbitration.
L- "Sponsôr" means Nabors Industries, IÞc., a l)elawarc
corporat¡on.
3. Namc, Äpplication and Coveragc
A, Tlre Program shall be refened to as The "Nabors
Dispute Resolutìou Progtam." Ahornatively' it may
be refe.rred 1o as thc "Dispulc Resolutiotl Prbgtam."
B. Until revoked by Sponsor pursuant to this Program,
this Program applies to a¡d binds the Company, each
Bnrployee and Applicant and the heirs, bencficiaries
and assigns of any such person or entity; provided,
however, that this Pnlgram shall not apply to any
Ëmployee in a unit of Hmployees represented by a
labor organization, or to fhe Corupany '¡'ifh respect to
such employees, except to the extent permiftcd in an
applicable collective bargaining agreement or lawfully
imposed by tlie Company rvhen ro eollectit'e bægain-
ing agreernent is in effcct
C. Except as provided for het'ei::, this Prog¡am applies to
any Dispute.
D. Notwithstanding anything to ihe cobtral)¡ it this
Progrâm, the Prograrn does not apply to clailus for
rvôl*ers' compensation benefits or unenrpicryment
c ompensati on bcnefits.
E. À4ediafion and arbitration elË only available for
Dispules involving legally plotected riglrts.
F twifhstsnding any other provisiou ; eof, any
court with jurisdiction over the Parties may issue any
injunctive o¡ders (including preliminary injunctÍ orm)
if the neaessary legal and equitable requirements
under applicable law are met pending the institution
of prooeedings under the Program. Furthermore, an
action under The Liruitalion of Ship Owners Liability
Ac\ 46 U.S.C. $$181-189, shall not be subjecf to lhis
Program.
4. Resolution of Disputes
All Disputes not otherwise settled by the Pa¡ties shall be
fìnally and conclusively resoived uude¡ this Program and
the Rules.
5. No Retaliation
No employee shall be subject to âny form of discipline or
retaliation for initiating or pariicipaling in gooc{ faith in
any process or proceeding uuder this Program'
6. Amendment
A. This Program may be amended by Sponsor at any
time by giving at least I0 days' notice to crurent
Ëmployees, Horvevet, no amendment shall apply to a
Díspute lbr which a proceeding has been initiated
pursuanl to the Rules, unless otherwi.se agreed.
B. Sponsor may amend ihe Rules at any time by serving
notice of the amendmetrts on AAA and JAMS.
However, no amendment of the Rules shall apply to a
Dispute for which a proceeding has been initiated
pursuant to the Rules unless otherwise agreed.
7. Termlnation
This Progmnr may be terminated by Sponsor at any time
by giving at least i0 days'notice of termination to surrent
Employees. However, temrination shall not be effective
as to Disputes for which a proceeding has been initiatcd
pursuant to the Ruies prior to the date of termination
unless olherwise agreed.
8. Appllcable Law
A. The A,ct shall appl¡, to this Program, the Rules, and
any proccedings under the Program or the Rules,
including any actions to compel, enfotce, vâcate or
confirm proceedings, awards, orders of an arbitator,
ot settlements under the Program or the Rules,
B. , I.
a¡bitrations held pursuant to this Pro¡ n shali be
corvened as near as possible to the worksite where
the events in dispute occurred if Nabors continues to
perfonn wo¡k at that location. Otherwise the
arbitration will occur at the place rnost convenient for
the majority of the witresses,
C. Other thari a.s expressly provided herein, or in the
Rules, the subsl¿ntive legal rights, rernedies, and
defenses of all Parties are preserved. In the case of
arbitration, the a¡bitrator shall have the authority to
determine the applicable law and to order any and all
relief, legal or equitable, whic.h a Party could obtain
from a couf of competerlt jurisdiction on the basis of
the claims made in the proceeding.
D. Other than as exptessly provided herein, o¡ in the
Rules, the Program shall not be construed to gralt
additional substantive, legal, or conlractual rights,
remedies o¡ defenses which would not be applied by
a court of competent jurisdiction inthe absence of the
Program.
E, Notwíthstanding the provisions of the prececling sub-
section, in any proceeding before an arbitrator, the
arbit¡ato¿ in his or her discretion, may allow a
prevailing Employee or Applicant a reasonable
attomey's fee as part of the awa¡d, The dise¡efion to
allow an award of fe¿s under this subsection is in
addition 10 any disoretion, right or power which the
arbitralor may have under applicable law, If the
arbitrator awa¡ds âttorney fcos without authorízadon
for such an âward by statute or conlract, such award
will be iimited to $2,500.00.
9, AdministrativeProceedings
A. This Program shall apply to a Dispute pending before
any local, stâte ü federal adminislrative body or court
ur:less prohibited by law
B. Parlioipation in any adminisüative or judicial
proceeding by thc Company shall not alïect the
applícability ofthe Program to any such Dispute upon
. termination of the adrninistrative or. judiciai
proceedings. A finding, recommendation or decision
by an adrninistrative body on the merits of a Dispute
shall have the same legal weight or effect unde¡ thç
Program as it wouid in a coufi of competent jurisdíc-
tion.
10. Exr ive Remedy
Proceedings under the Program shall be the exclusive,
final a¡d bindine method by which Disputes are resolved.
Il. Electing Entiúies
A. Corporations ot other legal entities, not otherwise
Paflies, may elect to be bound by this Program by
written agreement wíth Sponsor.
B. Election may be made only as 1o some types of
Disputes, or only a.s to sornp persons, in the disolction
of Ë,lecting Entity.
12. Effecfive Drtc
The Effective Date of this Program shall be April 15,
204r.
13. SeverabilÍty
The terms of this Program and the Rules are severable.
Thc invalidity or unenforceability of any provision there-
in shall not affect the applicalion of any other provision,
'Where possible, consistenf with the purposes of the
Program, any otherwise invalid provision of the Prograrn
or the Rules may be reformed and, as refotmed, enfo¡eed.
14. .{ssent
Employment or sontinued empþment after the Effective
Date of tbis Program constitutes consent by both the
Ernployee and tlhe Company to be bound by this Program,
both during the employment and after tennination of
employment, Submission of,an application, regardless of
form, for employment constitutes consent by both the
Applioant and the Company to be bound by this Program.
NABORS DISPUTE RESOLUTION RULES
l. Definitions
Alldefinitions included in the Nabors Dispute Resolution
Program apply fo these Rules.
2. Àpplication
A. lf different rules are applicable to a specific class of
Disputes, and have been adopted by Sponsor and
served on AAA or JAMS, tlese llules shall not apply
to such class of Disputes,
B. i :se Rules apply in the forn¡ existingi the time
proceedings are initiated under 1'hem,
C, To the extent consistent r¡'ith these Rules, the
Ernployment Dispute Resolution Rules of AAA or
JAMS also apply to all proceedings governed by these
Rdes.
3. ïnitiation of the Process
A. A Party may initiate proceedings under these Rules at
any time, subject to any defenses including those
. appiicable to the timeliness of the claim, including
limitations a¡rd laches.
-- Ê.' A Pä'rymay-inifiatc proceedings by servirrg a u'r'it1cn -- -
requgst to initiate proceedings on AAAor JAMS, and
tenderit:g the appropriate admini strative lee.
C, Copies of the request shail be served on all othe¡
Parties to the Dispute by AAAor JAMS. The request
shall describe the nature of the Dispute, the amount
involved, if any, the remedy soughq and the proceeding
locale requested.
D. Proceedings may also bc initíated by an Employee or
Applicant by serving a writtcn request to initiate pro-
ceedings on the Compauy's Dispuæ Resolution
Propçram Adminislrator. In such a oase? the Company
shall promptly forward arry properly served request it
has received to AAA or JAMS.
E. Parties against wirom a claim is asselted shall flle an
answering statement within 21 days of receiving
notice of intent to a¡bitrate or a specification of
claims, which shall include any counterclaims and
any request thatthe arbil¡ator (ifany) prçpare a stâte-
ment of reasons for thç awæd,
4, Administrative Conference
AAA or JAMS shall convene an administrative conference
as soon as possible after rcceiþt of the answe.ling state'
ment or after expiration of the time for filing an alswering
statement if one. has not been filed. The conferenoê mây
be held in person or by telephone. At the conferetlce,
AAA <¡r JAMS will deterrnine whether the Parties are in
agfeement on a method to resolve tlte l)ispute, If the
Pafties are in agreement, AAA or JAMS will implement
the procedure in accordance with their rulEs upon payment
of any applieable fpe, If the Parties camot agree, or if the
Pæ have prêviously attempted and failed¡ ¿solve the
Þispute by mediation ór alolher nonbinding mechanisut,
the Dispute shall be arbitrate.d under these Rr¡les.
5. ^A.ppointment of Ärbitrator
Immediately after payment of th€ arbitration fee, AAA or
JAMS shall sinult¿neously send. each Party an identical
list of names of persons chosen from a panel of qualified
arbitrators which,{AAor JAMS shall select and maintain.
Each Pafy to the Þispute shall. have fou¡teen (14) d¿ys
from the tmnsmittal date to sftike any irames objected to,
, number the remaining names in ordsr of preference, and
return the list to AAAor JAMS. If a Party does not Teïilrn
the list witbin the iime specified, ail persons therein shall
" -- be deemed-ar,ræptablu-Fl'om'åmoûg the-persons who "'- ---'
have been apptoved on botb lists, and in accorda¡roe with
the order of mutual pteference, AAAor JAMS shali invite
the acceptance ofthe arbit¡ator or arbitrators to serve. In
those cases where more than $2,000,000 is in controversy,
either Pa*y shall have the right to require that the
a¡bitration proceed before a tbreo member patrel rather
than a single arbitator. The Party who elects fcrr a panel
in these circumstances shal.l noti$ the other Parties during
the adminishative conference described ir Section 4 of
the Program. Any Party shatl have tbe right to strike one
list of arbitralors in ifs entirety, lVhen a Party exercises
this right, AAA or JAMS shall issue a new list of
arbitrators consistent with the above procedures.
6. Qualifications of the Arbitrator
No person shall ssrve as an arbitrafor in any matter irr
which that person has any financial or persortal interest.
I'rior to accepting appointment, the prospective arbi͡ator
shall disclose any circumstance likely to provent a prompl
hearing or create a presumption of bias. Upon receipt of
such infor¡nation from the a¡bitrator ot any other source,
AAA o¡ JAMS will either replace tlrat person or
cornmunicate the inform¿tion to the P¿*ics fo¡ comment.
Thereafter, AAAor JAMS may disqualify that persor¡ and
its decision shallbe conclusive.
7, Vacancies
If a vacarrey occurs for any reason or if an appointcd
arbitrator is unablc to serve promptly, the appointment
procedure in Section 5 shall apply to the selection of a
substitute arbiüatol
L Da¡ Time and Place of Hearings
A. The arbitralor shall set the date, tine and place of any
proceeding puxsuânt to lhe requirements of Section
88 of the Program.
B. Notiee of any hearing shall be given at least ten (10)
days in advance, unlcss the arbitrator detemilies or
the P¿¡ties agree that a shorter time is neeessaxy,
C. Ihe axbitrator shall make every effort, without undu-
ly incuning expense! to accommodate the Ërnployee
or Applicant in the selection of a proceeding,location.
9. Confcvcnc¿s
At the request of AAA or JAMS, or of a Party or on the
initiative of the arbitr¿tor,lhe arbitator or AAA or JAMS
may notioe and hold conferenoes for the discussion urd
determination of any matter rvhich will expedtte the
proceeding, including:
A. veaue,
B. clarification of issues,
C. determination of prelín:inaty issues, including sum-
mary determination of dispositive legal issues,
D. discovery,
E. thç time and location of proceedings or conferences,
F. interim legal orequitable reliefauthorized by applica-
ble law
G. pre- or postùearing memoranda.
H. stipulations; andlor
I. any other m¿fer of substance or procedure ,
10. Mode of Hearings and Conferences
In the discretion of the arbitrator or by agreement of the
Parties, conferences and hearings ruay be conduded by
telephone or by written submission, as well as in person.
11. Pre, aring Discovery
À. On any sohedule determined by tle a¡bitrato¡, each
Parly shall submit in advance the names and address-
es of the witnesses it intends to produce and arry doc'
uments it intends to present.
B. The a¡bitrator shall have discretion to determine the
fonn, amount and frequency of discovery by the
Parties.
C.. Discovery may take any form pernútted by the
" Federal Rules of Civil Procedurc, as amended from
time to time, subject 1o any restrictions imposed by
the arbitrator.
12. Representafion
Any Parry may be represented by coulsel or by any otlrer
authorized representative.
13. Attendance at Hearings
The arbitrator shall maintain the privacy of the procoedings
to the extent permitted by law. Any person having a direct
interest in the matter is entitled to attend the proceedings.
The arbitrator shall otherwise have the power to exclude
any witness, other than a Party or other essential person,
during the testimony of any otiier witness. The a¡bitrator
shall determine whether any other pcrson may attend the
proceeding. Upon the request of any Party, the arbitrator
shall exclude any witness during the testimony of any
othçr wibress.
14, Postponement
A. The arbitrator, for good cause shown by a Party, or on
agleement of the Parties, may postporre any proceed-
ing or confererrce.
B. The pendency of court proceedings related to the
same matter is not good cause for postponement.
15. Oaths
Befcre proceeding with the firsl hearing, each atbitrator
rnay take an oath of office and, if requiled by law, shall do
so. The albitrator may requÍre witnesses to testifr under
oath administered by any duly qualifïecl person and, if
required by law or requested by any Party, slrall do so.
16, Rec I of Proceedings
There shall be no stenograpiric, audio, or video record of
the proceedings unless either requested by one of the
Parties or specifìed b)' the arbilrator The Party requesting
tl:e record shall bear tbe entire cost of producing the same'
Copies of the record shall be fuurished to all other Parlies
upon request ancl upon pâyrìlent ofthc cost of reproduc-
tion,
17. Proccdurc
The proceedings shall be conducfed by the a¡birator in
whatever order and Ìrariller will nrost expeditiously
permit full presentaliou of tlts evidenee anci arguments of
the Panies.
18. Ar.bitration in the Absence of a Party
The arbitrator nlây proceed in the absence of Parties or
represeutativcs whÒ! after due notice" fail to be present or
fail to obtain a postponemenl. A¡r award shall not be made
solel5, e¡ the default o{i a Party. Tlre arbibatôr shall
roquire aly Part¡ who is present to submit such evidetrce
as the arbiftalor lr1ûy require for the making of an award.
19. Evidencc
A. 'i hc a¡bitrator shall be the sole judge af the relev"ancy,
materialíty, ard admissibility of evidencc offeled.
Conformity to legal rulcs of cvidence shall rrot be
necessar)'.
B. The arbi.trator may subpoena witrresses or docuntents
al the requesi of a Parly ol on the arbilrator's own
initiative..
C. 'llbe arbílrator may consider the evidence of rvilnesses.
by affidavit or declâratio¡, but shall give it only such
rveiglrt as the artritrator deems appropriate after con-
side¡ation of anv objectiol n:ade to its aclmission.
20. Post-Hearing Submissions
All clocumentarl, evidence to be considered by the a:'ilitralor
shall be filed $ rhe hearing rnless flre arbirator finds good
cause fo peruit a post-hearitig submis.sion. All Pallies
sh¿ll be a{Tor¿led an opportrurity fo exarnine and com¡nent
on any ¡rostJrealirtg evidence. 'llhe arbilr¿tor shall penttit
the tiJing of posl-ltcaring briefs at the requesl of a Putl'
an<l sball delemir:.e the procedure and timing of such äiings.
21. Cla g and Reopening of Froceedlngs
A, When the arbilrator is satisfied that the record is
complete, inctuding the submission of any post-hcaring
briefb or dooume¡ls pennifted by the arbitrator, the
arbitrator shall declare the p¡oceeding closed'
B. "lhe proceeding may be reopened on the arbitrator's
initiative or upon application of a Pafy at any tfuie
before the award is madc.
22. Wúver of Proeedures
Any Party rryhç fails to objecl in rvriting. after knowledge
that sûy provision or requirements e¡f these procedures and
" - Rule.s l1¿y8,.¡61-,þean..cornplied rvith, slrnll ..be. clecrned .to.
have waived the right to otrject.
23. Servicc of Notices and PaPers
Any papers, notices, ôr process necessary or proper for the
irritiation or continuation of any proceeding under these
Rules (ineluding the auard of the arbitrator' any court
action in connection therewith, or the entry of judgment
on an award made under these procedures) may be served
on a Party by mail addrcssod to the Parry ot his or her
representative at the last knqwn address or by personal
service. A\rQ{, JA}{S, the Partieq, and dre arbitlator may
also use facsimile transmission, telex, telegrarn, or other
written forms of elecbonis communication to give any
notices required bY these Rules.
24. Communications with the AAA, JAMS, and the
Company
A. Any Party may noticæ, servê or communicate with
AAAby contactingr
Regional Adminishator
Amerioan Arbitation Association
1001 Fannin St,, Suite 1005
Houston, Texas77A02
Q13) 739-t342
Fax: (713) 739-1142
B, Any Pa¡ty may notice, serve or comrnunicate with
JÂMS by conlaoting:
JAMS
345 Park Avenue" 8th F'loor
NewYork,NY 10154
(212) 7st-2700
Føx: Q12)75ï-4099
c. .y notice, serviÇe or cotnÍlunicâtii with the
Connpany will be to:
Legal Department
Nabors lndustries, lnc.
515 West Greens Road, Suite 1200
Houston, Texas 7 7 067 - 4525
(281) 874"0035
Fax: (281) 775-8431
25. Comnunicetion rvith the A.rbitrator
lhere shall be no çommunication between the Parlies arrd
the arbifrator other than at any oral hearings or confer-
ences. Any other oral or written communications fro¡n the
..-, parties .to-tire..arbitator shall .be directed. tolhe-AAA..or
JAMS (and copied to the Parties) for transmission to the
arbittator, unless the Par¿ies and the atbitrator agree other'
wise.
26. Timc of .{ward
The award shail bc prômptly made by the arbitrato¡
rurless otherwise agreed by the Pa¡tiss or specified by
applicable law. no later than thirty (30) days from the dats
of the closing of the proceeding or, if applicable, the
closing ofa reopened proceeding.
2?. Forúr of Award
the award shall be in wriling and shall be sìgned by the
arbìtrator. The a¡bitrator sliall write a statement of reasons
fo¡ the award if requested to do so in the request to
initiate proceedings or in the zurswering statament. The
award shall be exe¿uted in any manner required by appli-
cable law
28. Modification of Atvard
On order of a courf of competent jurisdiotion' or ol1 agreet
ment of the Palties, the arbihator shall rnodify any award.
The arbìtrator Dlây modify an award on the motion of a
Party if the arbihalor finds that lire award, as rendered, is
ambiguous or defective in form, or if the award requires
an.illegal or irnpossible act. .These are the only ciroum-
stanses under which an arbitrator shall have ju¡isdiction to
withdr¡iw or modify an award.
29. Set nent
Iftbe Parties setfle tlreir Dispute during the course of the
a¡bitration, the arbitrator may set out the terms of the
settiement in a consent award.
30. Scope of Ärbitrator's Authority
The a¡bitrator's authority shali be limited to llle resolution
of legal Disputes between the Farties. As such, the
arbitrato¡ shail be bourd by and shall apply applicable law,
including that related to the allocation of tlie bu¡den of
proof; as weil as subst¿ntive law, The a¡bitratsr shall ncf
have the authority either fo abridge or enlarge substantive
'rights
available under applicable lau¿ 'fhe arbitrator may
- 'also graut eme¡gency-or-temporary relief tlrat is'or would
law. The a¡bitrator shali be
be authorizcd by applicable
bound by and shall comply with the provisions of the
Progrâm and Rules.
31, Judicial Procccdings and Exclusion of Liabilify
A. Neither AAA, JAMS, nor any arbitratot is â nesesssty
Party in aly judiciai proceedings relating to proceed-
ings under these Rules,
B. Neither AAA, JAMS, nor any a¡bit¡alor shall be liable
to any Party for any ac-t or omission in corurection
with any proceedings within the scope of these Rules.
C, A:ry court with jurisdiction over the Pæties may
oompel a Party to proceed unde¡ these Rules at any
place and may enforce any award made.
D. Parties to these Rules shali be deemed to havç
consented that judgrnent upon the award of thc
arbitrator may be entcred and enforted in any federal
or state court having jwisdiction of the Partjes.
E. Initiation of, p'aficipation in, or removal of a legal
proceeding shall not constitute waiver of the right to
proceed under these Rulss.
F. Any court with jurisdiction over fhe Pañ.ies nray issue
any injrurctive . orders. (iucluding prelinrinarl, injunc-
tions) if the necessary legal and equitable require-
ments under applicable law are met. pending thc
institution of procee<lings under these Rules.
32. Fee rd Expenses
A, 'Ibc expenses of rvitnesses shall be borne by the ParÇ
producing such rvitnesses' exoept as otherwise
provided by larv or in tlte ar¡¿ald of the a¡bitlator,
B, .A.ll attomeys' fees sl:all be borne by the Party
incutriug them exc.cpl as othenvise provided by larv.
by the Proglam, or in the award of úc arbit¡ator.
C. Discovery costs (e.g., court reportcr fees for origirral
t'anscrþts) shall be borne by thc Party iniliating lhe
discovery. Thc cost of copies of deposition transcr:ipts
or ofher discovery shall be borne by the Party ordering
the copy.
D. The fees and expenses of experts. consulfallts and oth'
ers retained or consulted b¡' a Party shall he borne by
the Parly utilizing drose selises.
E. The Ernployee or Applicant shail pay a $150 fec if he
or shc initíates arbjtrafiol or uredjation' Olhelrvise,
Employee/Applicanl Partjes shall not tre responsible
for payment of lbes atd expenses of ptcecrlings
under tlese Rules, including reqlriled lravel of a¡r
arùitrator or a mediator' expenses ol'an arbilrafo¡
nrediator. AAÂ or "IAMS, and the cost of any ploof
¡:roduccd at the discretion ofan a¡bit¡ator.
F'. If'the denland fo:: ¡nediation or arbit¡ation is ir:itiated
by the Contpany, such fees q'il1 ì:e paid by the
Conrpany.
G, l?xcept as olherwise pror4cled by law or in the arryar:d
of'thc arbitrator, all other expenses, fccs and costs of
proceedings under these Rules shall be borrrc equally
by tlio Parties who are not Ernployees/Applicants.
33. fnter¡retafion anrl A¡rplication of Thcsc ltulos
llhe arbitrator shall ititerpret and apply these Rules insofar
as ttrcy relate to thc arbitrator's poltlrs antl tluties. All
othsr rules shall l¡e in intcrpreted and appliecf by the AA,,\
or JAMS.
34. Applicable Larv
A. Proeeeditrgs under thesc R,Llles ald ally iudicíal
review of au,irrds shall bs govetned b)' lhe Act.
9¿ t cept wherc otherwise exprcssly provi' I in these
Kules, tlre substantíve law applied $hâll be st¿te or
federal substarúivç law which would be applied by a
Uniæd States District Court sitting at the place of the
proceedÍng
35. Medi¡tion
At any time bçfore the procecdìng is closed, the Pa¡ties
may agree to mediate their dÍspute by notifring AAA or
JAMS. .4,{.4. or JAMS shall deter¡sine wtat procedures
apply tc any such mediation,
36. Spanish
Nabors lndustries, lnc.
April2001
{llr
January 11,2017
'
TO; All Employees of Nabors Industries,Ino. a¡d Subsidiaries
RE: Nabor¡ Dispuæ Resolution Program
Dear Employee:
Effective tan (10) days after he date of tbis notico, prlrsuånt æ Sectiol 6 of the Nabors Dispute
Rrsotution Progar4 Nabors ludushies; Inc. ('Nabon') gãd its sr¡bsidieries are arnending the
Nabors Þirpute Resolution Prograrn and Rules for the determination of all. dispuæs between
employees and Nabors or ous of its suhsidia¡iãs.
f¡e aûcndmentc æ ttre Piogra; *¿ frrl* *"
u*lol.¿ oo't!" baok of this fage. Nabots is
amending ono (I) sectíon of the N¿box Ðisputc Resolution Progr¡m and one (1) section of the
Nabors Dinpute Resolutiou Rulas. You should already bave a copy of the cu¡rest Program and
Rulcsn or they mey be found on the Nabors Intranet under policy number 200.80.1 at
hüo y'/sqgrsf)abt.uaba$.co$/C I OlHil &ao %Z0ReÈou¡rooç/dof iu li. a¡fä
As before, the Nabors Ðispute Resolutiou Program. as arrcndcd, gives you.fle most effective
.and effrcient mۋns of-rosolving any dispulies you may have through s process which encourages
resotution at fte sarliest opportunity, Enployecs do not waive any substantive iegal rights under
the Prograo- Ra&er, tåe Frograo, as aurendcd, provides that any substaative legal issues you
may htve witl be resolved oir'a¡i individual basis il mediafion or befors a neukal a¡bíEator,
whose deoision will bo ûnal and binding on you and the Compauy. Under the Program, as
ame¡ded, however,.you waive any procedural rights you may bave to briug e cotrt acfion, on an
individu¿1 or on,t,qtass, orillcolirre or ropresenlative basÍs; and you waive your right to a jury friai
coaoeming any {ispute you mey bave with the Cotpany or ary Electing Eotity (ae defi¡cd in the
. Program), inoludbg auy personal iqiury claims or cl¿ims of disorimination based ou race,
n¡tional origrn, geuder, rcligion, ago o'r disability under any federal or shþ oivil rights statutE.
Every individual who worla fo¡ N¿bors Indus*ies, Inc. or a subsidiary is subject to tho Program,
as amended" exccpt that the amonded provísions will affect only disputes initiated after the
effective date of ihe arieadments, and not my matters pendinè before tbe efÊctive date. Your
continued emplo5'ment afrer the date you teceive this notice will constituüc your acce,ptance of
tåe amendureats to the Program, both during and aflpr your emploltrent with thb Company.
We look fontr¿rd to continuing to rvork together. tf you have any questions about the
¿glendments to tho Program and Rules or aûy other lerrn of yoúr employmont please do not
hesitate to contacttre Human Resources Departrnent of your employer.
Sinceroly,
NABORS INDUSTRIES, INC.
*,1 øpy olthls nol'æe ís avollable in lpanßIa upon rcqbesg
fram aty Nabars suisldlaqt!* IIaudn Resoarces DE atTtacn¿
+ Unø copb 4c ega noticíø cill dlqtonÍhle en español con solo re4ucrirlø
al Ðeparfouenlo de Rs¿ur¡os lltttnanos ðe caolqrl¿r sabsldìa¡la ú¿ Nøúors,
,4qendm ept f s TIII N.a'ß OBS ÐISJLTTE R$QOI,UTION PRQ CB.dM I
4, Re¡olution of Disputes
¿-. All Dispuæs not othenpise se$led by the Palies shail be finally end coaclusively regolved r¡nder
tlis Progmm and the Rulcs. The Parties forego arry right either rray bave to a jrny frial on claims
relating in any way to any Dirpute.
8. Eacb Diçute shall be arbitxated oa an individual basis, The Parties forego and waive any rigbt to
join çr consolidate claime in a¡bitation with others or to m¿ke olains in arbitation æ a
' ropresentative or as ¡ mcmber ola class or in a private attomey general or similar capacity, unless
zucÉ'prooedures are agtccd to by all Parties. Ncither thc Company nor ¿ny Employee or
Appücant may pursue any Di¡pute on ¿ class action, collectivo action oi consolidated basis or in a
re,proseffativa capacity ø behalf of ofåer porsorls or cntities who a¡e claimed io be similarly
" dituated; of pãifðiþÉilc i¡'s I okss menr?tðr j¡ súch a. prtíceèding. üõ, iÍrltiuafôr rä ariy proceedlng
" under tlis }rogram sh¿Il have no autlority to conduct th'e mattcr as ¿ consolidated, clæs,
collective or represênt¿tive action.
C. If the procedural ümiution in Paragraph B of thìs ,Section is held unenforcoable by * cotnt in a
procecding ín rvhioh a party seeks úo pursue a consolidated, class or colleotive action or others¡ise
aot in a røpresenfative capacity, then flis Program shall apply to such ptqce€ding only to tJre
. following exte¡rl The cou¡t will deoidç whefhor the Disputo should prooæd on a consolidatd
cla¡s, colloctivc or other re¡:ræentative basis sJ¡{ if sq will definc tbe ncopo of the slass. None
of tbe forogobrg detcrø.iuatiot¡ sb¿ll be submited tq thc drbitraør, and in no ovent shall tle
a¡bitator have the power to detennine class, Çollective ot re,pfesentativo action certificetion. Tho
court's decisions will bo subject to appeal purÉuaüt to tåe applicable rules of procedure. If the
court certifies a olaôs, colleotive oÍ other representative action, then all other detemdnatíons in or
relaæd to the Díspute shall be mado by the arbitator. The a¡bi$¿tor shall detersrino questions of
liabitity to or'of tåe clæs ¿s a wbole and romedies available to or fròm tle olass as a whole. The
afb¡!:ètor sh¿ll also decidç the reliet if Ðy, to wbioh a patty or class me¡nbcr may be entitled
iadividualty. If the court, however, ultímafely denies a parly's request úo proceed o.n a
consolidated, class, oolleoüive or ropresentative baeis, thon that party's individual claím(s) shall
sti1l be subject to this Program and referable to ¡rbiüation püJsuâût to itÁ tsrbs.
:
30. Scope of Arbftrator'¡ Authority
A. Thc a¡bitrator's authority shall be liflited to the resolutlon of legal Disputes between the Parties.
As suc\ the a¡titatsr shall be bound by and shalt apply applicable iaw, including that related ûo
the allocation of the bu¡deu of proof, as well as substantive law. The arbitrator sball not have the
authority either to abridge or enlarge subs{¿utive rights available under applicable law. The
arbitator may also gtâût eürergsncy of te.mporary relief that is or would be authorized by
applicable law. fhe arbitrator ¡hall be bound by and shall oomply with tl¡e pmvisious of the
Program aad R¡les.
B.
' Tbe arbihator shall not h¿ve thc powor to hear a.uy cl¿ims in arbihation as a class or collective
action, or in aprivate atioiney general or simila¡ capaciþ, or on any other represontativc capacity
basis, or, absent fhe consent of all parfies, on a consolidafed basis. Thp arbitaûor shall be
authorized to decide only the dirputed claims bçtwcçn tle i¡dívidual parties.
PROGRAMA DE RESOLUCIÓN DE
CONFLICTOS DE NABORS
Copies of thß pamphlet are available in Spanish, upon
request,from any Nabors subsidiary's Human
Resources Department.
Copias de este þlleto estan disponible en español con
solo requerirlas al Departamento de Recursos
Huttanos cuolQu yr subs Nahors
¿U rdyry ,lU
PROGRAMA DE RESOLUCIÓN DE CONFLICTOS DE
NABORS
l. I. Propósito y Diseño
El Plogranra está diseñado con el fin de proporcionar un
medio parc la resolución rápida, justa, accesible y
económica de conflictos entre la Compañía y los Empleados
actuales y anteriores de la Cornpañfa y los Aspirantes para
puestos de empleo, con respecto a o corno consecuencia de
una relación de empleo actual, anterior o potencial con la
Compañía. EI Progratna está diseäado para facilitar un
proceso para la resolución definitiva de todas los Conflictos
descriptos en los términos del misnlo. No está diseñada para
linitar o aumentar los derechos fundamentales disponibles
bajo las leyes aplicablos. El Programa modifica eu forma
contractual la relación de empleo efectuado entre la
Compañla y sus Empleados, pero sólo en la medida en que
esté expresamente establecido en el Programa, El Prograrna
deberá ser interpretado de acuerdo con esta intención.
2. Definiciones
A. UAAA" significará la Asociación Americana de
Arbitraje (the American Arbritration Association)
B. "JAMS" significará los Servicios de Mediación y
Arbitraje Judiciales (Judicial Arbilration and
Mediation Services)
C, La "Ley" significará la Ley Federal de Arbitraje (the
Federal Arbitlation Act)
D. La "Compañía" significará el paÛocinador del
Programa y las filiales directas o indirectas (ya sean una
corporación, una compañla de responsabilidad limitada,
una sociedad u otra entidad legal) del patrocinador, la
Entidad que Selecciona el Programa, la entidad o
persona que se alega tiene responsabilidad asociada o
separada con respecto a cualquier Conflicto, y todos sus
directores, funcionarios, empleados y agentes, plan de
beneficios, ya sea exento o no-exento de impuestos,
establecido o rnantenido por dicha entidad, los
fìduciarios, agentes y empleados de dichos planes, y los
sucesorcs y beneficiarios de dichas entidades, planes y
personas; siempre y cuando, en el caso de la Entidad
que selecciona ei Programa, "La Compañía" deberá
incluir la Entidad que Selecciona el Programa
solamente en la medida establecida en e! contrato de
dicha Entidad en la que estará obligada por el
Programa.
E. "Conflicto" signifrcará todas las denrandas legales y
justas, los reclamos y controversias, de cualquier lndole
o tipo, ya fueren contractuales, o de responsabilidad
extracontractual, de acuerdo con el derecho escrito o las
regulaciones o alguna otra ley, entre las pattes
obligadas por el Programa o por un contrato para
resolver los Conflictos de acuerdo al Programa, o entre
urìa persona obligada por el Programa y una persona o
entidad con derecho a recibir sus benefìcios, incluyendo
pero sin limitarse a lo siguiente:
1 este Programa;
L la contratación o la posible recontraiaciÓn de un
Empleado, incluyendo los términos, condiciones o
el cese de dicho empleo con la Compañla;
J los beneficios o incidentes de ernpleo con la
Compañia;
4. todo asunto relacionado con la relación entre el
Empleado y la Compañla incluyendo, por ejemplo
pero sin limitarse a: la discriminación basada en la
raza, el sexo, la religión, el origen nacional, la
edad, la condición de veterano de guerra o
cualquier incapacidad; el acuso sexual u cualquier
otro tipo de acoso; las represalias por concepto de
compensación laboral; la difamación, la imposición
de un agravio emoçional, la reclamación de
antimonopolio relacionado con sueldos o el estado
de, una reclamación por o una membresía
relacionado con los planes de beneficios para
ernpleados;
5. la solicitud de un Aspirante para un puesto de
empleo y las acciones y decisiones de la
Cornpañía con respecto a dicha solicitud; y
6. cualquier lesión personal supuestamente incurrida
en o alrededor del sitio de trabajo de una Compafiia
o durante el término y alcance de las actividades
laborales de un Empleado,
El "Conflicto" incluye todo lo anteriormente men-
cionado, independientemente del momento en que
hayan ocurrido los eventos en los cuales estén basados,
incluyendo los asuntos basados en eventos que hayan
sucedido antes de que el Empleado estuviera sujeto a
este Programa (siempre y cuando dichos conflictos no
fueren establecidos con anterioridad en un tribunal
juridico) o después de la termiuación de la releción de
ernpleo
t'. La "Bntidad que Selecciona el Programa" significará
toda entidad legal que hubicra acordado una obligación
por medìo el Programa de acuerdo a las disposiciones
de este documenlo.
C. El "Empleado" significará toda persona que estuviera o
hubiera sido empleada por la Compañía a la fecha o
después de la fecha de vigencia de este Programa,
incluso si estuviera o no estuviera empleado por la
Compañía en el mornento en que una demanda fuera
presentada en relación con un Conflicto, y que residiera
en los Estados Unidos de América, o que estuviera
sujeto a las leyes de los Estados Unidos o de cualquier
estado, municipalidad u otra subdivisión polftica de los
Estados Unidos.
H. El "Aspirante" significará toda persona que estuviera
buscando o que haya buscado empleo con la Compañia
después de la fecha de vigencia de este Proglama.
Las "Partes" significarán, las personas perjudicadas en
relaciólr con un Conflicto particular, y/o las entidades
que obligadas y vinculadas por estc Pt'ograma.
J. El "Programa" significará este Programa de ResoluciÓn
de Conflictos de Nabors, y como f'uere modifïcado de
tiempo en tiempo.
K. Las "Reglas" significarán las Reglas para la Resolución
de Conflictos de Nabors, según fueran modificadas de
tiempo en tiempo, que seBn aplicables a Ia rnediación y
el arbitraie.
L. El "Patrocinador" signifrcará Nabors Industries, Inc.,
una corporación del estado de Delaware.
3. Nombre, Aplicacién y Cobertura
A. El Programa será denominado el "Programa de
Resolución de Conflictos de Nabors". De forma alter-
nativa, podrá ser referido como el "Programa de
Resolución de Confl ictos".
B. Hasta que sea revocado por la entidad Patrocinadora de
acuerdo con lo dispuesto en este Programa, dicho
Programa se aplica y obliga la Compañla" cada
Empleado y cada Aspirante y sus herederos, ios bene-
fìciarios y los cesionarios de dicha persona o entidad;
siempre que este Programa no se aplique a un
Empleado que sea parte de un grupo de Empleados
representados pol'una organización laboral o a la
Compañía relacionada con dichos empleados, excepto
en la medida permitida en un convenio de negociación
colectiva (entre patronos y sindicatos obreros) o
legalmente impuesto por la Compañía cuando ningún
convenio de ncgociación colectiva estuviera vigente.
C. Este Programa se aplica a todo Conflicto, salvo se
estipule lo contlario en este documento.
D. Sin perjuicio de lo estipulado en este Programa, el
mismo no se aplica a las reclarnaciones por concepto de
indemnización o compensación de beneficios para
obreros o de beneficios por concepto de desempleo,
E, La rnediación y el arbitraje estátr solamente disponibles
para los Conflictos que involucren derechos que
estuvieren protegidos legalmente.
F. Sin perjuicio cle otras disposiciones establecidas en
este documento, todo tribunal conjurisdicción sobre las
Partes puede emitir órdenes judiciales (incluyendo
requerimientos judiciales preliminares) si los requer-
imientos legales y equitativos de acuerdo a las leyes
aplicables se cumplieran durante la institución de las
demandas bajo el Programa. Adicionalmente, una
demanda bajo la Ley denominada The Limitation of
Ship Owners Liability Act, 46 U.S.S $$l8l-189, no
estará sujeta a este Programa.
4, Resolución de Conllictos
Los conflictos que no fueren resueltos por las Pafies serán
definitivamente resueltos de acuerdo con este Programa y
sus Reglas.
5. Artículo referente a Represalias
No se podrá imponer ninguna forma de disciplina, ni se
deberá tolnar represalias con los ernpleados por haber ini-
ciado o pafticipado de buena fe en un proceso o una
demanda de acuerdo con este Programa,
6. Enmienda
A. Este Programa puede ser modifrcado por el Patrocinador
en cualquier momento rnediaute una notificación previa
a los empleados actuales de por lo menos l0 dlas. Sin
embargo, no se deberá aplicar ninguna enmienda a un
Conflicto por el cual una demanda haya sido iniciada de
R"*l"t t"lvo conven8a cõnrar¡o
acuerdo cån las se lo
B. El Patrocinador puede modificar las Reglas en cualquier
momento por medio de la notilicación de las enmiendas
en AAAy JAMS. Sin embargo, ninguna entnienda de
las Reglas deberá aplicar a un Conflicto por el cual una
demanda haya sido iniciada de acuerdo con las Reglas,
salvo se acuerde lo contrario.
7. Terminación del Programa
Este Programa podrá ser ter¡ninado por el Patrocinador en
cualquier momento mediante la notificación a los
Empleados actuales en un plazo no mayor de l0 días previo
a la terminación antedicha. Sin embargo, la terminación no
entrará en vigencia para los Conflictos para los cuales una
demanda haya sido iniciada de acuerdo con las Reglas antes
de la fecha de terminación, salvo se acuerde lo contrario.
8. Ley Aplicable
A. La Ley se aplicará a este Programa, las Reglas y
cualquier demanda realizada de acuerdo al Programa o
lds Reglas, incluyendo Ias demahdas para obligar, hacer
cumplir, anular o confirmar demandas, adjudicaciones,
órdenes de un árbitro, o resoluciones de acuerdo al
Programa o las Reglas,
B. Todos los arbitrajes efectuados de acuerdo con este
Programa deberán sel convocados tan cerca como fuera
posibte del sitio de trabajo donde sucedieton los eventos
en disputa, en caso que Nabors continrie realizando
labores en esa ubicación. De lo contrario, el arbitraje
tomará lugar en el sitio más conveniente para la mayor
parte de los testigos.
C. Salvo se establezca de manera expresa en las Reglas
contenidas en este documento, se cons€rvan los dere-
chos legales fundamentales, los recursos y los mecan-
ismos de defensa de todas la Partes. En caso de arbi-
traje, el árbitro tendrá la autoridad para determinar las
leyes aplicables y de ordenar las compensaciones
legales o equitativas, que una Parte pudiera obtener de
un tribunal de jurisdicción competente en base a las
reclamaciones presentadas en Ia demanda.
D. Salvo se estipule de forma expresa en este documento, o
en las Reglas del mismo, no se deberá interpretar el
Programa con el propósito de otorgar derechos, recursos
o mecanismos de defensa fundamentales, legales o
contractuales adicionales, los cuales no podrfan ser
aplicados por un tribunal de unajurisdic-
ción competeûte en ausencia del Programa.
E. Sin perjuicio de las disposiciones establecidas en la
subcláusula anterior, en toda demanda presentada ante
un árbitro, el árbitro, a su total discreción, podrá per-
mitir que un Empleado o Aspirante prevalcciente reciba
los honoralios para el pago de abogados como parte del
fallo dictado. La discreción para permitir la concesión
de una asignación de honorarios de acuerdo a esta
subcláusula será adiciotral a toda discreción, derecho o
autolidad que el árbitro pudiera tener de acuerdo a las
leyes aplicables. Si el árbitro concede los honorarios de
abogado sin la autorización para dicha asignación pot
derecho escrito o contrato, dicha asignación estará
limitada a $2,500.00.
9. Procesos Administrativos
A. Este Programa se deberá aplicar a un Conlìicto que
e$tuviera pendiente ante toda entidad administrativa o
tribunal local, estatal o federal, a menos que estuviera
prohibido por la ley.
B. La participación en todo proceso administrativo o
judicial por la Compaäía no deberá afectar la aplica-
bilidad del Programa a dicho Conflicto una vez que
fuere terminado el proceso administrativo o judicial. Un
fallo, una recolnendacién o una decisión efectuada por
una entidad administrativa en base a los mél'itos de un
Conflicto deberá tener el tnismo peso o efecto legal de
acuerdo al Programa como si hubieran sido dictados por
un tribunal de una jurisdicción cotnpetente.
10. Recurso Exclusivo
Los procesos efectuados de acuerdo al Programa deberán
ser el método exclusivo, inapelable y vinculante por medio
de los cuales se resolverán los Conflictos.
Il. Las Entidades que Seleccionen el Programa
A. Las Corporaciones u otras entidades legales, qu€ no
fuesen Partes del mismo, tienen la opción de decidir si
quisieren esfar vinculadas y obligadas por este
Programa mediante un contrato escrito con el
Patrocinador.
B. Dicha opción para parlicipar en este Progtama puede
ser efectuada en relación con algunos tipos de
Conflictos, o en relación con algunas personas, a dis-
creción de la Entidad que Seleccione el Programa.
12. La Fecha de Vigencia
La Fecha de Vigencia de este Prograrna será e1 I 5 de abril de
200 1.
13. A,tribución de Separación
Los términos de este Prograrna y las Reglas son separables.
La falta de validez o de la obligación para que se
cumplieran algunas de las disposiciones en este documento
no afectará la aplicación de las otras disposiciones. Donde
fuere posible, y en forma consistente con los propósitos del
Programa, toda disposición que fuera invalidada en el
Programa o en las Reglas se podrá modihcar y después de
modificada, se podrá obligar su cumplirniento.
14. Asentimiento
El empleo o la continuación del empleo después de la
Fecha en Vigencia de este Programa constituyen el con-
sentimiento por parte del Empleado y la Compaflfa para
estar obligados por las disposiciones de este Programa,
durante la duración del empleo y después del cese del
mismo. La presentación de una solicitud de empleo, inde-
pendientemente del fonnulario utilizado, constituye el
consentimiento por parte del Aspilante y la Compañla para
estar obligados por las disposiciones de este Programa.
REGLAS PARALA RtrSOLUCIÓN
DE CONFLICTOS DE NABORS
1. Definiciones
Todas las definiciones incluidas en el Programa de
Resolución de Conflictos de Nabors se aplicarán a estas
Reglas.
2. Aplicación
A. Si hubieran reglas diferentes que fueran aplicables a una
determinada clase específica de Conflicto, y éstas
lrubieran sido adoptadas por el Patrocinador y notifi-
cadas a AAA y JAMS, estas Reglas no se aplicarán a
dicha clase de Conflictos.
B. Estas Reglas se aplican de la forma en que existieran en
el morngnto cn que se iniciatan los procesos
establecidos de acuerdo con las mismas.
En la medida que fuera consistente con estas
L
las Reglas de Resolución de Conflictos Laborales de
AAAo JAMS también se aplicarán a todos los pt'ocesos
reglamentados por estas Reglas.
3. El Inicio del Proceso
A. Una Parte puede iniciar la demanda de acuerdo con lo
establecido por estas Reglas en cualquier momento,
sujeto a los mecanismos de defensa e incluyendo
aquellos que apliquen en el tiempo oportuno de la
reclamación, incluyendo las limitaciones y demoras
indebidas.
B. Una Pafe puede iniciar la demanda mediante Ia entrega
de una solicitud escrita para iniciar 1a demanda en
AAAo JAMS y después del pago de cargo adminis-
trativo correspondiente.
C. Las copias de la solicitud deberán ser entregadas a todas
las otras Partes del Conflicto por AAAo JAMS. La
solicitud deberá describir la índole del Conflicto, el
monto involucrado, si !o hubiese, el recurso que se
solicita y el sitio solicitado para el proceso.
D. Las demandas también pueden ser iniciadas pot un
Empleaclo o Aspirante mediante la entrega de una
solicitud escrita para iniciar los procesos al
Administrador del Programa de Resolución de
Conflicfos de la Compaflía. En dicho caso, la Compañía
deberá entregar en la brevedad posible a AAA o JAMS
toda solicitud que hubiera recibido y que hubiera sido
entregada en forma apropiada.
E. Las Partes contra quienes se haya presentado una
demanda deberán presentar una declaración en
respuesta a dicha demanda dentro del plazo de 2l días
de la fecha a partir de la que se recibió la notificación
de la intención dc arbitraro la descripción de las
reclamaciones, Ia cual deberá incluir las contrade-
mandas y las solicitudes para que el árbitro (si lo
hubiera) prepare una declaración fundamentando las
razones por las cuales se concede la indemnización.
4. JuntaAdministrativa
AAA o JAMS deberán convocar una junta administrativa
tan pronto como sea posible después de haber recibido la
declaración de respuesta o después del vencimiento del
plazo para la presentación de la declaraciÓn de respuesta, si
dicha declaración no hubiera sido presentada. La junta
puede ser sostenida en persona o por teléfono. En lajunta,
En la medida que fuera consisteute con estas
* .
AAAo JAMS determinarán si las Partes han acordado un
método para resolver el Conflicto. Si las Panes estuvieran
de acuerdo, AAA o JAMS implementarán el proceso de
acuerdo con sus reglas una vez que se haya efectuado el
pago del cargo conespondiente. Si las Partes no pueden lle-
gar a un acuerdo, o si las Partes hubieran intentado llegar a
un acuerdo y no pudieron resolver el Conflicto por medio
de la mediación u otro mecanismo que no fuera vinculante u
obligatorio, el Conflicto deberá ser arbitrado de acuerdo
con estas Reglas.
5. El Nombramiento de un Árbitro
Inmediatamente después del pago del cargo por concepto
de arbitraje, AAA o JAMS deberán enviar sirnultállearnente
a cada Parte involucrada una lista idéntica de los nombres
de las personas que Íìreron escogidas de un panel de árbitros
calificados que AAA o JAMS cleberá seleccionar y
mantener. Cada una de las Partes del Conflicto tendrá
catorce (14) días a partir de ia fecha del comunicado para
tachar los nombres que no prefiere, numerar en orden de
preferencia los nombres restantes y devolver la lista a AAA
o JAMS. Si una de las Partes no regresara la lista dentro del
plazo especificado, todas las personas en la misma serán
consideradas como aceptables. Entre las personas que
hayan sido aprobadas en ambas listas, y de acuerdo con el
orden de preferencia mutua, AAAo JAMS deberán invitar a
que uno de ellos o más de uno ejerza./n de árbitro/s. En los
casos en los cuales más de $2,000,000 esté en controversia,
cualquiera de las pafies tendrá el derecho de solicitar que el
arbitraje proceda delante de un panel de tres miembros en
vez de un solo árbitro. La Parte que escoja un panel en
estas circunstancias deberá notificar a las otras Partes
durante lajunta adlninistrativa descrita en la Cláusula 4 del
Plograma. Cualquiera de las Partes tendrá el delecho de
tachar una lista de árbitros en su totalidad. Cuando una de
las Partes ejercita este derecho, AAAo JAMS deberá emitir
una nueva lista de árbitros de manera consistente con los
procesos anteriormente mencionados.
6. Requisitos para la designación dc un Árbitro
Ninguna persona deberá ejercer como árbitro en ningún
caso en el cual dicha persona tuviera un interés financiero o
personal. Antes de aceptar el nombramiento, el posible
candidato deberá revelar cualquier circunstancia que posi-
blemente pudiera impedir una audiencia oporluna o crear la
presunción de parcialidad. Una vez recibida dicha infor'-
mación por parte del árbitro o de cualquier otra fuente,
AAA o JAMS tendrá que sustiluir esa persona o çomu-
nicar la información a las Partes involucradas para que
A partir de entonces,
puedan formular sus comentarios.
AAA o JAMS podrán descalificar dicha persona y su
decisión será concluyente.
7. Vacantes
Si hubiera una vacante pol cualquier raz6n o si un árbitro
designado no pudiera ejercer en forma oportuna, se deberá
aplicar el proceso para determinar nombramientos descripto
en la Cláusula 5 para la selección de un árbitro substituto.
8. Fecha, Hora y Sitio para las Audiencias
A. El árbitro deberá frjar Ia fecha, hora y sitio de cualquier
proceso efectuado dç acuerdo con las disposiciones de
la Cláusula 88 del Programa.
B. Se proporcionará la nofificación de la audiencia con un
plazo no mayor de diez (10) dlas de anticipación, salvo
que cl árbitro determinara o que las Partes convengan
que un periodo más corto fuera necesario.
C. El árbitro deberá realizar su labor, sin incurrir en gas-
tos indebidos, para acomodar el Empleado o el
Aspirante en la selección de un sitio para el proceso.
9. Juntas
A pedido de AAA o JAMS, o de una de las Partes o por
iniciativa del árbitro, el árbitro de AAA o JAMS podrá
convocar a juntas previa notificación para la discusión y la
determinación de cualquier asunto que agilice el proceso,
incluyendo:
A. la jurisdicción,
B, la aclaración de asuntos de especial interés
C. la determinación de asuntos preliminares, incluyendo
el sumario de Ias consideraciones y disposiciones
legales
D. la junta prevía a la audiencia
E, el tiempo y sitio para los procesos o juntas de arbitraje
F. los recursos equitativos o legales interinos autorizados
por las leyes aplicables
C. los memorandums anteriores o posteriores a la audi-
encia
H. las disposiciones, y/o
I. cualquier otro asunto o proceso fundamental
10. La modalidad para realizarAudiencias y Juntas
A discreción del árbitro o por común acuerdo entre las
Partes, se podrán realizarjuntas y audiencias por leléfono o
por escrito, así como en persona.
11. La Junta previa a la A.udiencia
A. En un horario que será determinaclo por el ár'bitro, cada
una de las partes deberá entregar por adelatttado los
nombres y direcciones de los testigos que se pro-pone
presentar y también los documentos que tiene planeado
presentar.
B. El árbitro tendrá la discreción para determinar el for-
mato, la cantidad y la frecuencia de las juntas con las
Partes involucradas.
C. Las juntas antedichas podrán tomar el formato permi-
tido por las Reglas Federales para Procesos Civiles, ser
modificadas de tiempo en tiempo, y estar sujetas a las
restricciones impuestas por el árbitro.
12. Representación
Cualquiera de las Paúes podrá ser representada por un
abogado o por cualquier otro representante autorizado
13. La Asistencia a las Audiencias
El árbitro deberá guardar la privacidad de los procesos hasta
donde fuera permitido por la ley. Todas aquellas persoltas
que tienen un interés personal en el caso a ser tratado ten-
drán el derecho de asistir a los procesos de arbitraje.
El árbitro deberá tener la autoridad de excluir a cualquier
testigo que no fueta una de las Partes u otra persona esen-
cial, durante del testimonio de otros testigos. El árbitro
deberá determinar si alguna otra persona podrá asistir al
proceso. A pedido de cualquiera de las Partes, el árbitro
deberá excluir cualquier testigo durante el testimonio do
otros testigos.
14. Aplazamiento de los procesos o juntas de arbitraje
A. El árbitro, dcbido a una causa justificada demostrada
por una de las Paftes, o de común acuerdo con las
Partes, podrá postergar cualquier proceso o junta de
arbitraje.
B. La realización de procesos judiciales pendientes y
relacionados con el mismo asunto no constituye una
causa justificada para su aplazamiento.
I5. Declaración Jurada
Antes do proseguìr con la primera audiencia, cada árbitro
podrá tomar eì juramento para el ejercicio de su cargo y así
lo hará si fi¡era requerido por la ley. El árbitro puede
requerir que los testigos tcstifiquel bajo juramento con-
ducido por una persona debidamente calificada y así lo hará
si fuera requerido por la ley o requerido por alguna de las
Partes,
16. Registro de los Procesos de Arbitraje
No habrá ningún registro estenográfico, de audio o video de
los procesos de arbitraje salvo que fueran solicitados por
alguna de las Partes o determinado por el árbitro. La Parte
que solicite el Íegistro deberá pagar el costo total de su
producción. Se suministrarán copias del registro a pedido
de las otras Partes y \na vez que se haya pagado el costo de
la reproducción.
17. Proceso
El Proceso deberá ser dirigido por el árbitro en el orden y
de la manera que permita la más rápida preseniación de la
evidencia y de los argumentos de las Partes.
18. El Arbitraje en Ausencia de una de las Partes
El árbitro podrá proseguir en ausencia de una de las Partes o
ropresentant€s que, después de la debida notificación, no se
presentaran o no obtuvieran un aplazamiento. No se
alcanzarâ un fallo solamente en base a la falta de asistencia
de una de las Partes. El árbitlo deberá requerir que
cualquiera de las Partes presentes presente toda la evidencia
que el árbitro requiriera con el ftn de alcanzar un fallo o
conceder una asignación.
19. Evidencia
A. El árbitro será el único que juzgará la relevancia, la
importancia, y la admisibilidad de la evidenciaque
fuera presentada. La conformidad con las reglas legales
referentes a evidencia no se¡á necesaria.
B. El ár'bitro puede citar con una orden de comparecencia a
testigos o documentos a pedido de una de las Partes o
por Ia inicìativa propia del árbitro.
C. El árbitro puede considerar la evidencia de los testigos
mediante una declaración jurada o una declaración, pero
le deberá dar el peso que el árbitro considere apropiado
después de haber considerado cualquiel objeción hecha
para su admisión al proceso de arbitraje.
20. Presentación de la Evidencia después de la Audiencia
La evidencia documentada a ser considerada por el árbitro
deberá ser presentada en la audiencia salvo que el árbitro
encuentre una justifìcación pala que se perrnita una pre-
sentación posterior a dicha audiencia. Se les deberá propor-
cionar a todas las Partes la oportunidad para examinar y
comentar sobre cualquier evidencia que fuera presentada
posteriormente a la audiencia. El árbitro deberá permitir la
presentación de expedientes a pcdido de una de las Partes y
deberá determinar el proceso y el momento oportutro de
dicha presentación.
21. El Cierre y Ia Reapertura de los Procesos de Arbitraje
A. Cuando el árbitro esté satisfecho que el registro está
completo, incluyendo los expedientes que hayan sido
presentados con su permiso después de la audiencia, el
árbitro deberá declarar el cierre del proceso.
B. Se podrá reabrir el proceso por iniciativa del árbitro o
mediante la solicitud de una de las Partes en cualquier
momento anterior al fallo del árbitro.
22. Renuncia al Derecho de Objetar en el Proceso de
Arbitraje
Después de haber tenido conocimiento de gue no se hubiera
cumplido con las disposiciones o requerimientos
relacionados con estos procesos y reglas de arbitraje,
cualquiera de las Partes que no se oponga por escrito será
considerada como que hubiera renunciado al derecho de
objetar,
23. Notificacioncs
Cualquier comunicado, notificaciones o procesos necesar-
ios o apropiados para la iniciación o la continuación de
cualquier proceso de arbitraje efectuado de acuerdo con
estas Reglâs (incluyendo el fallo del árbitro, cualquier
demanda judicial en relación con el mismo, o la adjudi-
cación de una indemnización efectuada de acuerdo con estos
procesos) puede ser enviado por correo dirigido a la Parte o
su representante a la dirccción más reciente cle la cual se
tuviera conocimiento o entregado mediante un servicio de
mensajeria. AAAo JAMS, las Partes, y el árbitto también
podrán usar la fransmisión por facsímile, telex, telegrama, u
cualquier otra forma escrita de comunicación electrónica
con el fin de entregar cualquier notificación tequerida por
esta Reglas.
24, Lz Comunicación con AAA, JAMS y la Compañfa
A Cualquìera de las Partes podrá notificar o comunicarse
con AAA, comunicándose con:
Regional Administrador
(Adrnilistrador Regional)
American Arbitration Association
(Asociación Amsricana de Arbitraj e)
1001 Fannin St, Suite 1005
Houston, Texas 77002
(7 t3) 739-13022
Fax: (71 3) 739-1702
B. Cualquiera de las Par-tes podrá notificar o comunicarse
con JAMS, comunicándose con:
JAMS
345 Park Avenue, 8th Floor
NewYork,NY 10154
(212)751-2700
Fax: (212) 751-4499
C. Cualquier notificación o comunicado con la Compañla
deberá ser dirigido a:
Legal Department (Departamento Legal)
Nabors Industries, lnc.
515 West Greens Road, Suite 1200
Houston, T exas 7 7 061 -4525
(28r) 874-0035
Fax: (281) 775-8431
25. Conrunlcación con el .Árbitro
No habrá ninguna comunicación con Ias Partes y el árbitro
aparte de la comunicación en las audiencias o juntas de
arbitraje. Cualquier otra forma de comunicación ya sea oral
o esuita de las paftes al árbitro deberán ser dirigidas a
AAA o JAMS (y su copia enviada a las Partes) para ser
transmitidas al árbitro, salvo que las Paftes y el árbitro
acuerden 1o contrario.
26. Plazo para efectuar el Fallo de Arbitraje
El fallose efectuará rápidamente por el árbitro, salvo que
se hubiera acordado lo contrario por las Partes o que estu-
viera estipulado por las leycs aplicables, en un plazo no
mayor de treinta (30) días a partir de la fecha del ciene de
los procesos o, si fuera aplicable, del ciere de un proceso
de arbitraje que haya sido reabierto.
27. El Formato del Fallo de Arbitraje
El fallo del arbitraje deberá ser por escrito y deberá ser fir-
mado por el árbitro. El árbitro deberá redactar una
declaración de las razones para el fallo, si fuera requerido
en Ia solicitud para iniciar los procesos o en la declaración de
respuesta que se hubieran presentado, El fallo del árbi - tro
deberá ser ejecutado de la manera requerida por las leyes
aplicables.
28. Modificaciones del Falto del .{rbitro
Como consecuencia de un mandato de un tribunal de juris-
dicción competente, o por común acuerdo entre las Pafes, el
árbitro deberá modificar cualquiêr fallo que se hubiera
dictado. El árbitro podrá modificar un fallo rnediante la
moción de alguna de las Partes si el árbitro considera que el
fallo fuera ambiguo o presentara algún defecto, o si el fallo
requiriera un acto ilegal o imposible de realizar. Estas son
las únicas circunstancias por medio de las cuales un árbitlo
tendrá jurisdicción para retirar o modificar un dictarnen o
fallo.
29. Resolución
Si las Partes resuelven su Disputa durante el transcurso del
arbitraje, el árbitro podrá describir los términos de la res-
olución en un fallo de consentimiento.
30. Alcance de la Autoridad det Árbitro
La autoridad del árbitro deberá estar limitada a la resolución de
Conflictos iegales entre las Partes. Como tal, el
árbitro deberá estar obligado por y deberá aplicar las leyes
aplicables, incluyendo las que estén relacionadas con la
determinación del peso de la prueba, así como las leyes
fundamentales. El árbitro tendrá la autoridad para limitar o
extender los derechos fundamentales protegidos por las
ieyes aplicables. El árbitro podrá tarnbién conceder un
recurso de emergencia o provisional que esté o que podrfa
estar autorizado por las leyes aplicables. El árbitro deberá
estar obligado a cumplir con las disposiciones del Programa
y las Reglas.
31. Los Procesos Judiciales y la Exclusión de
Responsabilidad
A. Ni AAA, JAMS o ningún árbitro deberán constituir
ninguna de las Partes de ningún proceso judicial en
relación con los procesos de arbitraje efectuados de
acuerdo con estas Reglas.
B. Ni AAA, JAMS o ningrln árbitro será responsable ante
ninguna de las Partes por ningún acto de ornisión en
relación con cualquier proceso que se encuentre dentro
del alcance de estas Reglas.
C. Cualquier tribunal con jurisdicción sobre las Pattes
podrá obligar a alguna de las Partes a proceder de
acuerdo con estas Reglas en cualquier lugar y podrá
hacer cumplir cualquier fallo que se haya dictado.
D. Se considerará que las Partes bajo estas Reglas con-
sienten en que el fallo del árbitro podrá ser admitido y
que dicho fallo se podrá hacer cumplir en cualquier
tribunal federal o estatal que tuviera jurisdicción sobre
las Partes.
E. La iniciación de, la participación en, o la eliminación de
un proceso legal no constituirá una renuncia al derecho
a procoder de acuerdo con estas Reglas.
F. Cualquier tribunal con jurisdicción sobre las Partes
podrá presentar órdenes judiciaìes (incluyendo órdenes
preliminares) si se cumplieran los requisitos legales
necesarios y equitativos de acuerdo con las leyes
aplicables, en espera de la institución de los procesos de
arbitraje efectuados de acuerdo con estas Reglas.
32. Honorarios y Gastos
A. Los gastos de los testigos deberán ser pagados por la
Parte que presenta dichos testigos, salvo se indique lo
contrario en las leyes aplicables o en el fallo del árbitro,
B. Todos los honorarios de los abogados deberán ser
pagados por la Parte que los contrató, salvo se indique
lo contrario en las leyes aplicables, en el Programa o en
el fallo del árbitro.
C. Los costos de las juntas a realizarse (por ejemplo; los
honorarios del relator para la transcripción original)
deberán ser pagados por la Parte que inicia lajunta. El
costo de las copias de la transcripción de la declaración
jurada y cualquier otro costo deberá ser pagado por la
Pa¡te que solicite la copia.
D. Los honorarios y los gastos de los peritos, asesores y
demás que fueren presentados o consultados por una de
las Partes, deberán ser pagados por la Parte que utilice
dichos servicios.
E. El Empleado o Aspirante deberá pagar un cargo de
$150 si él o ella inicia el arbitraje o mediación. Aparte
de dicho cargo, el Empleado / Aspirante no será
responsable de pagar los honorarios y gastos del pro-
ceso efectuado de acuerdo a estas Reglas, incluyendo
los viáticos rcqueridos de un árbitro o mediador, AAA o
JAMS, y el costo de cualquier evidencia que fuere
presentada a la discreción del árbitro.
F. Si la demanda para mediación o arbitraje es iniciada por
la Compañia, dichos honorarios serán pagados por la
Compañía.
G. Salvo se indique lo contrario en las leyes vigentes o en
el fallo del árbitro, todos los otros gastos, honorarios y
costos del proceso efectuado de acuerdo a estas Rcglas
serán pagados de manera equitativa por las Partes que
no son Empleados/Aspirantes
33. Interpretacién y Aplicación de Estas Reglas
El árbitro deberá interpretar y aplicar estas Reglas en lo que
respecta a los poderes y deberes del árbitro, Todas las otras
reglas deberán ser interpretadas y aplicadas por AAA o
JAMS.
34. Ley Aplicable
A. Los Procesos efectuados de acuerdo a estas Reglas y la
revisiónjudicial de los fallos deberán ser regidos por la
Ley.
B. Salvo se indique lo contrario de forma expresa en estas
Reglas, las leyes fundamentales aplicadas
deberán ser leyes estatales o leyes federales funda-
mentales que serían aplicadas por un Tribunal de
Distrito de los Estados Unidos que tomara el lugar del
proceso de arbitraje.
35. Mediación
En cualquier momento después de que el proceso de arbi-
traje haya concluido, las Partes podrán acordar la
mediación de su disputa por medio de la notificación de
AAAo JAMS. AAAo JAMS deberán determinar que pro-
cesos se aplican a dicha mediación.
36. Español
Este Programa de Resolución de Conflictos se €ncuentl'a
disponible en inglés y en español
Nabors lndustries, lnc.
April 2001
{lll)
17 de enero de2007
A: Todos los Empleados de Nabors Industries, Inc. y Subsidiarias
REF: Programa de Resolución de Disputa de Nabors
Estimado Empleado:
A partir de diez (10) días después de la fecha de este aviso, de conformidad con la Sección 6 del
Programa de Resolución de Disputa de Nabors de Nabors Industries, Inc. ("Nabors") y sus subsidiarias
están enmendando el Programa y Reglamentos de Resolución de Disputa de Nabors panla
determinación de todas las disputas entre los empleados y Nabors o una de sus subsidiarias.
Las enmiendas al Programa y Reglamentos están anexas en la parte posterior de esta página. Nabors
estás enmendando una (1) sección del Programa de Resolución de Disputa de Nabors y una (l) sección
de los Reglamentos de Resolución de Disputa de Nabors. Usted debe ya tener una copia del programa y
los reglamentos actuales o pueden encontrarse en la Intranet de Nabors, de acuerdo a la política número
200.80.1, en http:lisharepoint.nabo .
Como antes, el Programa de Resolución de Disputa de Nabors, incluyendo sus enmiendas, le da los
medios más efectivos y eficientes para resolver cualquier disputa que pueda tener, a través del proceso
que estimula la resolución a la oportunidad más inmediata. Los empleados no renuncian a algún derecho
legal sustantivo de acuerdo al Programa. En su lugar, el programa, incluyendo sus enmiendas, estipula
que cualquier asunto legal sustantivo que pueda tener, sea resuelto sobre una base individual por
mediación o ante un árbitro neutral, cuya decisión será final y que lo obliga a usted y a la Compañía. De
acuerdo al programa. incluyendo sus enmiendas, sin embargo, usted renuncia a todo derecho de
procedimiento que pueda tener para iniciar una acción judicial en base individual, colectiva, de clase o
repres
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.