22 Cited authorities

Rent-A-Ctr. v. Jackson
561 U.S. 63 (2010) Cited 2,812 times 65 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an arbitration provision is severable from the remainder of the contract," even where the contract containing the arbitration provision is itself an arbitration agreement (quoting Buckeye , 546 U.S. at 445, 126 S.Ct. 1204 )
AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Commc'ns Workers of Am.
475 U.S. 643 (1986) Cited 5,509 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that it was for the court to decide whether a particular labor dispute fell within the arbitration clause of a collective-bargaining agreement
Green Tree Fin. Corp.-Ala. v. Randolph
531 U.S. 79 (2000) Cited 2,469 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that claims under the Truth in Lending Act are arbitrable
Chiron Corp. v. Ortho Diagnostic Sys.
207 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 1,278 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "district court correctly found that the federal law of arbitrability under the FAA governs the allocation of authority between courts and arbitrators" despite arbitration agreement's choice-of-law provision
Simula, Inc. v. Autoliv, Inc.
175 F.3d 716 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 625 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that disputes “need only touch matters covered by the contract containing the arbitration clause and all doubts are to be resolved in favor of arbitrability”
Oracle Am., Inc. v. Myriad Grp. A.G.
724 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2013) Cited 265 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that a carve-out provision excepting certain claims from an arbitration provision does not abridge an otherwise clear and unmistakable delegation of arbitrability questions to the arbitrator
Dream Theater, Inc. v. Dream Theater
124 Cal.App.4th 547 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 168 times
Concluding the parties intended the arbitrator to decide arbitrability because the agreement incorporated the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules
In re Jiffy Lube Intern., Inc., Text Spam Litigation
847 F. Supp. 2d 1253 (S.D. Cal. 2012) Cited 84 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding that the defendant could not compel arbitration with the plaintiff under an agreement related to an earlier oil change when the plaintiff alleged that text messages he received about future services violated the TCPA
Tompkins v. 23andme, Inc.
Case No.: 5:13-CV-05682-LHK (N.D. Cal. Jun. 25, 2014) Cited 37 times
Holding that a filing fee of $975 under the AAA Commercial Rules to pursue a claim relating to a $95 purchase did not “ ‘shock the conscience,’ particularly relative to litigation expenses.”
Cayanan v. Citi Holdings, Inc.
928 F. Supp. 2d 1182 (S.D. Cal. 2013) Cited 33 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that under South Dakota law "continued use of a credit [card] account" constitutes assent to arbitration

Marisa Lainer v. Uber Technologies Inc.

22 Cited authorities

Holding that "an arbitration provision is severable from the remainder of the contract," even where the contract containing the arbitration provision is itself an arbitration agreement (quoting Buckeye , 546 U.S. at 445, 126 S.Ct. 1204 )

Holding that it was for the court to decide whether a particular labor dispute fell within the arbitration clause of a collective-bargaining agreement

Holding that claims under the Truth in Lending Act are arbitrable

Holding that "district court correctly found that the federal law of arbitrability under the FAA governs the allocation of authority between courts and arbitrators" despite arbitration agreement's choice-of-law provision

Holding that disputes “need only touch matters covered by the contract containing the arbitration clause and all doubts are to be resolved in favor of arbitrability”

Holding that a carve-out provision excepting certain claims from an arbitration provision does not abridge an otherwise clear and unmistakable delegation of arbitrability questions to the arbitrator

Concluding the parties intended the arbitrator to decide arbitrability because the agreement incorporated the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules

Finding that the defendant could not compel arbitration with the plaintiff under an agreement related to an earlier oil change when the plaintiff alleged that text messages he received about future services violated the TCPA

Holding that a filing fee of $975 under the AAA Commercial Rules to pursue a claim relating to a $95 purchase did not “ ‘shock the conscience,’ particularly relative to litigation expenses.”

Holding that under South Dakota law "continued use of a credit [card] account" constitutes assent to arbitration