requires that the “parties in their agreement have agreed that a judgment of the court shall be entered upon the award made pursuant to the arbitration.” See Section 9. What language is required in an agreement to indicate that a judgment of the court is authorized is not set forth in Section 9. While several courts have held that “an explicit agreement between the parties providing for judicial confirmation of an award is not an absolute prerequisite to [S]ection 9 authority to enter judgment on the award,” see Booth v. Hume Pub. Inc., 902 F.2d 925, 930 (11th Cir.1990) (where parties agree that arbitration would be binding and final, district court has authority to enter judgment on award); see also Milwaukee Typographical Union No. 23 v. Newspapers, Inc., 639 F.2d 386, 390 (7th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 838, 102 S.Ct. 144, 70
holding that there is nothing for a court to review when an agency has never issued a final and binding judgment that has the force of law holding that the term final and conclusive precludes judicial review of army claims decisions holding an appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration recognizing intervention is generally impermissible after entry of final judgment and exception allowing postjudg ment intervention in the interests of justice is limited to permitting intervention by affected persons so that an appeal can be taken holding that an award deemed to final conclusive and binding implicitly agrees that federal court intervention may be sought to compel compliance