Federal judge confirms Stake.us arbitration award in Massachusetts

U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns confirmed an arbitration award in favor of Stake.us operator Sweepsteaks Limited on October 16, 2026, and denied two players' motion to set it aside. The six-page Massachusetts order concerned whether their arbitration agreement was binding. The award was limited to arbitrability: whether the dispute was subject to arbitration, rather than a decision on the underlying gambling allegations.

Why the court rejected the challenge

The players challenged the court's authority to confirm the award and argued that arbitrator Paula M. Bagger had exceeded her powers. Stearns found a basis for confirmation in 9 U.S.C. Section 207, which governs awards covered by the New York Convention on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. That provision directs courts to confirm qualifying awards unless a Convention ground for refusal or deferral applies.

The judge found the required international connection in a commercial agreement between U.S.-domiciled individuals and a company incorporated in Cyprus with its principal place of business in Australia. The agreement governed the players' access to and use of Stake's website.

The players also relied on Section 10(a)(4), which permits courts to set aside awards where arbitrators exceed their powers. Stearns found that they had not met that standard. The parties' agreement specifically delegated arbitrability questions to the arbitrator, and the players had participated in arbitration and argued their position there.

How the case reached judicial review

Marcos Moreira and Wascar Deleon brought the proposed class action in May 2025. The public docket records a May 23 commencement date for case 25-cv-11481-RGS. The October order describes their allegations that Stake's sweepstakes offering evades gambling laws.

In a November 20, 2025 order, Stearns compelled arbitration and stayed the court proceedings. He held that the contract assigned the question of the arbitration agreement's validity to the arbitrator. The players had challenged the agreement on grounds including a clause allowing Stake to modify its terms unilaterally.

According to the October order's account, the players submitted an arbitration demand on December 22, 2025. Bagger determined on July 30, 2026, that the arbitration agreement was binding. The players sought to overturn that finding on August 31; Stake opposed their request and sought confirmation on September 21.

The confirmed award establishes no damages payment or determination of the gambling claims. The signed orders document the arbitration referral and subsequent review, while any later appeal or substantive ruling would require a separate court record. The October 16 decision should not be read as a general judicial approval of sweepstakes casinos.