You might rethink that.... While it might be faster with an arbitrator, I doubt the timeframe would change with a Magistrate Judge (all the same hurdles, I believe). IMO, going the arbitrator route depends totally on the arbitrator. Look to how an arbitration works.... Both (all) parties agree to put their destiny in the hands of a third party, who reviews all evidence presented (with no opportunity for prior review by the other party - no effective specific defense). In arbitration, all the court rules go out the window. Then the arbitrator makes a decision, IF he's compitent enough to grasp the evidence presented. Big gamble for both sides (i.e., they'd never agree to this route, IMO, though it would allow our team to present things - like the settlements to date - that they may be prevented from presenting in court). Perhaps you're confusing arbitration with mediation? Mediation is essentially a negotiation. An I'd bet that behind the scenes - or maybe right out front (to please the court) - there is an ongoing negiation going on - offer/counter-offer. FWIW, SGE