by the negotiated, detailed, and extensive procedures for alternate dispute resolution that were included in the joint business agreement. The question of whether Ortho’s res judicata defense to arbitration is itself an arbitrable issue is bound up with the question of who should make such a determination. Although we have not had previous occasion to consider this issue, we find the Second Circuit’s analysis persuasive: a res judicata objection based on a prior arbitration proceeding is a legal defense that, in turn, is a component of the dispute on the merits and must be considered by the arbitrator, not the court. See National Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Belco Petroleum Corp., 88 F.3d 129 (2d Cir. 1996); see also John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Olick, 151 F.3d 132 (3d Cir. 1998) (<HOLDING>). In the case before the Second Circuit, Belco
holding that under ordinary contract principles the parties should be bound by an arbitration provision requiring that disputes be arbitrated only before particular fora holding that res judicata and collateral estoppel apply to arbitration award holding that prior arbitration has no collateral estoppel effect absent agreement of parties on subsequent arbitration but noting that california precedent accords res judicata effect to serial arbitration proceedings recognizing that in reviewing ruling on motion to compel arbitration we first determine whether party seeking arbitration established existence of arbitration agreement holding res judicata objection based on prior arbitration is issue to be arbitrated under national association of securities dealers arbitration procedures