The Second Circuit recently affirmed in relevant part, an order compelling arbitration of claims under Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act in connection with the termination of the plaintiff’s employment. The plaintiff alleged that the six-month limitations period in the arbitration clause did not provide a sufficient opportunity to exhaust administrative remedies, thus rendering the arbitration agreement invalid. The court rejected this argument, holding that it was “not clear” under Title VII and the ADA that the plaintiff “would be required to exhaust administrative remedies prior to arbitration.” And even if exhaustion prior to arbitration was required under the law, “an arbitration provision that requires an employment discrimination claim to be arbitrated before statutory exhaustion procedures could possibly be completed is easily construed as reflecting the parties’ agreement to waive such requirement, as well as any defense based on that requirement.” Additionally, the court held, “the arbitrator would seem to be the appropriate party to determine these issues and related ones,” such as whether the exhaustion requirement applies and whether the parties’ agreement should be construed to waive that requirement. Virk v. Maple-Gate Anesthesiologists, P.C., et al., Case No. 15-513-cv (2d Cir. July 1, 2016).