Legal Opinion

T. Marzetti Company v. Pacific Choice Brands

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided April 10, 2026No. 2:25-cv-00438Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION T. MARZETTI COMPANY, : Plaintiff, Case No. 2:25-cv-438 v. Chief Judge Sarah D. Morrison Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura PACIFIC CHOICE BRANDS, : Defendant. OPINION AND ORDER Pacific Choice Brands (“PCB”) moves to compel the arbitration of the claims asserted against it by T. Marzetti Company and to stay this case pending completion of such arbitration proceedings. (ECF No. 20.) The motion is fully briefed and ripe for consideration. (See ECF Nos. 21, 22.) For the reasons below, PCB’s motion is GRANTED. I. BACKGROUND1…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2019
  4. Morgan v. Sundance, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2022
  5. Preston v. FerrerSupreme Court of the United States · 2008

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API