Whether arbitrator exceeded his powers by awarding on a matter not submitted to him

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Respectfully Mrs. Graulau is addressing the following questions over each of two issues heard and decided by lower tribunals as a single whole case for two separated filed motion to vacate and motion to correct. Issue I-Questions Presented Over Motion to Correct — Whether for respondent’s counterclaim arbitrator has awarded upon a matter not submitted to him by petitioner or referred by the court not bind to arbitration agreement? ' — Whether there is not a valid arbitration agreement for respondent’s counterclaim which is a matter only for the court to decide? ~ Whether obligations under arbitration agreement ended upon termination of the contract from which it was annexed/derived? Issue II-Questions Presented Over Motion to Vacate Whether the courts below has interpreted important precedential case Hall St. Assocs., L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc, 552 U.S. 576, 584 (2008) and the Federal Arbitration Act, in a way that is in direct conflict with other relevant controlling precedent of this Court, Florida Supreme Court and Circuits opinions that is contrary to provision under U.S. Federal Code? | ~Whether “manifest disregard” of law is a basis for vacatur re-conceptualized within the exclusive grounds under 9 U.S.C. § 10? — Whether there is “complete diversity” jurisdiction on the face of motion to vacate? ii ! i . 1 -Whether petitioner’s claims are not time bared; time statutes limitations are nonjurisdictional subject to federal-state toll laws and equitable tolling doctrine? ~ Whether for petitioner's claims arbitrator engage in partiality, misconduct, and/or : exceeded his power? ~ Whether petitioner's claims are not longer suitable for arbitration? . i