AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

ANTHONY W. LUCKERT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. TESLA ENERGY OPERATIONS, INC., et al., Defendants.

VINCE CHHABRIA, United States District Judge.

Re: Dkt. No. 22

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

VINCE CHHABRIA, United States District Judge.

Tesla's motion to compel arbitration is granted. The Power Purchase Agreement entered into by the Luckerts and Tesla incorporates the JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules into its arbitration provision. The applicable rule provides: “Jurisdictional and arbitrability disputes, including disputes over the formation, existence, validity, interpretation or scope of the agreement under which Arbitration is sought…shall be submitted to and ruled on by the Arbitrator.” That type of language has been held to “clearly and unmistakably” delegate the question of arbitrability to the arbitrator under Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 1125, 1128 (9th Cir. 2015); see Oracle America, Inc. v. Myriad Group A.G., 724 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2013); Rohm Semiconductor USA, LLC v. MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc., No. 20-cv-06686-VC, 2021 WL 822932 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2021); Caviani v. Mentor Graphics Corp., No. 19-CV-01645-EMC, 2019 WL 4470820 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2019). Tesla's motion is thus granted, and the case is dismissed without prejudice. See Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale's, Inc., 755 F.3d 1072, 1073-74 (9th Cir. 2014).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Luckert v. Tesla Energy Operations, Inc.
(Aug 5, 2021)