Page:Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski.pdf/10

Rh that appeal, Congress need not say anything about a stay. At least absent contrary indications, the background Griggs principle already requires an automatic stay of district court proceedings that relate to any aspect of the case involved in the appeal. By contrast, when Congress wants to authorize an interlocutory appeal, but not to automatically stay district court proceedings pending that appeal, Congress typically says so. Since the creation of the modern courts of appeals system in 1891, Congress has enacted multiple statutory “non-stay” provisions. Indeed, Congress enacted a “non-stay” provision the day before enacting §16(a) in 1988. See 102 Stat. 4120 (“Neither the application for, nor the granting of, an appeal … shall stay proceedings in the Court of Veterans Appeals”).

In short, the Griggs rule requires that a district court stay its proceedings while the interlocutory appeal on the question of arbitrability is ongoing.

To overcome the Griggs principle, Bielski advances five main arguments. None is persuasive.

First, Bielski contends that an automatic stay would encourage frivolous appeals that would improperly delay district court proceedings. To begin with, Bielski has not established that frivolous appeals frequently occur in the Circuits that have long applied the Griggs principle in