Hendricks v. At & T Mobility, LLC
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION AND STAYING CASE
CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.
This is a purported class action against AT & T Mobility (“Defendant” or “AT & T”) relating to its billing practices. See generally Compl. (dkt. 34). Defendant has moved to compel arbitration and stay the case during arbitration, arguing that, in light of AT & T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 1740, 179 L.Ed.2d 742 (2011), Plaintiff cannot avoid arbitration. See Mot. (dkt. 35). The Court agrees.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Patrick Hendricks is an AT & T iPhone subscriber whose terms of service are…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- James v. Conceptus, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2012
- Charlene A. Shorts v. AT&T MobilityWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2013