LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. At the beginning of 2013, appellant New Balance Athletics, Inc. ("New Balance") entered into a contract (the "Distribution Agreement") with Peruvian Sporting Goods S.A.C. ("PSG") to distribute its products in Peru. This Distribution Agreement contained an arbitration clause, which New Balance invoked in 2018 to initiate arbitration proceedings against PSG. Also joined as respondents in this arbitration were appellees Rodrigo Ribadeneira, the controlling owner of PSG, and Superdeporte Plus Peru S.A.C. ("Superdeporte"), another business entity owned by Ribadeneira in Peru. The arbitrator issued two awards, which imposed liability on PSG and Superdeporte for breach of the Distribution Agreement, and on PSG, Superdeporte, and Ribadeneira for tortious interference. The arbitrator also rejected three counterclaims brought against New Balance.
Ribadeneira and Superdeporte subsequently filed a motion in the district court to vacate the arbitration awards. The awards had to be vacated, they contended, because they were nonsignatories of the Distribution Agreement, and hence not subject to its arbitration clause. Agreeing that the arbitrator had improperly exercised jurisdiction over Ribadeneira and Superdeporte, the district court vacated the awards. Because we conclude that theories of assumption and equitable estoppel apply here to support arbitral jurisdiction over appellees, we reverse the judgment of the district court.