A somewhat exasperated-sounding opinion from a federal court in Maryland addressed a litany of allegations and procedural issues raised by a pro se defendant’s motion to dismiss the action seeking confirmation of an arbitration award, as well as a motion to continue the case, based on the defendant’s medical condition. While according the pro se defendant “leniency” in addressing a number of procedural defects, the court nevertheless found that the defendant failed in his various pleadings to meet the high standards for vacating an arbitration award under the FAA. The court also found that no continuance based on the defendant’s medical condition was necessary because the court had sufficient information to rule on the various motions. The court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, denied his motion to continue, and granted the petitioner’s motion for entry of a confirmation order. Colonna v. Hanners, Case No. 10-1899 (USDC S.D. Md. June 1, 2011).