In this vein, courts hold that parties waive their right to challenge an allegedly “untimely” award when they do not object during the arbitration proceedings, but rather wait until filing a motion in district court seeking vacatur of the award pursuant to the FAA—particularly when time is not of the essence in the  parties’ arbitration agreement, and there is no showing of prejudice caused by the delay. E.g., Davis v. Producers, 762 F.3d 1276 (11^th Cir. 2014), cert. den. 575 U.S. 913 (Party waived right to challenge arbitration award as untimely where he did not object during arbitration but waited until filing in district court seeking vacatur of award pursuant to FAA, and failed to show he was prejudiced by delay); Hasbro v. Catalyst, 367 F.3d 689 (7^th Cir. 2004) (Time was not of essence in parties’ arbitration agreement, precluding vacatur of arbitration award on grounds arbitrators had exceeded powers by taking too long to render award; neither arbitration agreement nor governing rules stated time was of essence, and conduct of parties did not indicate differently); Success Village v. Amalgamated Local 376, 380 F.Supp.2d 95 (D. Conn. 2005) (Arbitration panel’s failure to render timely arbitration award did not warrant vacating award, where there was no showing that party objected to the delay prior to issuance of the award, or suffered actual harm stemming from delay); In re A.H. Robins Co., 211 B.R. 199 (E.D. Va. 1997), affirmed 166 F.3d 331, cert. denied 528 U.S. 1082 (Allegation of arbitrator error in failing to render timely decision did not warrant vacating award given lack of evidence claimant was prejudiced by arbitrator’s delay).

“It is well settled that arbitrators are not required to disclose the basis upon which their awards are made and courts will not look behind a lump-sum award in an attempt to analyze their reasoning process…United Steelworkers…v. Enter…., 363 U.S. 593, 598… (1960); …Remmey v. PaineWebber…., 32 F.3d 143, 151 (4th Cir.1994) (`[A]rbitrators need not state reasons for reaching a particular result’); In re Arbitration…Under Grain Arbitration Rules, 867 F.2d 130, 135 (2d Cir.1989) (`[A]rbitrators may render a lump sum award without disclosing their rationale for it’….Sargent v. Paine Webber…., 882 F.2d 529, 532 (D.C.Cir.1989) (`We reject the idea that a lump-sum award can be rejected for want of explanation (or, what is in effect almost the same thing, remanded for an explanation) in the absence of facts…that…arbitrators committed…error justifying vacation of the award’).” 

Usually, an arbitration award is not invalid because it denies “all” claims but omits reference to a specific claim or claims. E.g., Remmey v. PaineWebber, 32 F.3d 143, 150–51 (4th Cir.1994)(“Remmey’s… argument…fails. The…ruling states…`All Claims…shall be and are hereby dismissed in all respects.’ This statement…  could hardly be more final and definite…Antwine v. Prudential Bache Sec., Inc., 899 F.2d 410, 413 (5th Cir.1990) (holding that a similar award satisfied the `mutual, final and definite’ requirements). That the arbitrators…did not mention all of Remmey’s claims is of no moment…. [T]he Supreme Court has held that arbitrators need not state reasons for reaching a…result…United Steelworkers…v. Enterprise…., 363 U.S. 593, 598…(1960). [This] §10(a)(4) argument [is]…merely a final attempt to secure a second shot at a recovery.”); Rollins v. Prudential, 10 F. App’x 510, 512 (9th Cir. 2001)(“Considering…the…statement that `All Claimant’s claims are denied in their entirety’ and that `the undersigned arbitrators have decided in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination,’ it seems clear that the arbitrators considered and denied all of Rollins’ claims….Accordingly, we conclude that the arbitrators’ failure to list the FMLA claim specifically…does not…justify vacating the arbitration award”). E.g., American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) Award Preparation Fact Sheet (Awards “generally” have a part “declaring that the award is in full settlement of all claims and counterclaims submitted to the arbitration,” and “in domestic commercial arbitrations, the AAA does not encourage commercial arbitrators to write opinions which give their reasons for the award”).

Award Preparation Fact Sheet