Legal Opinion
Stiener v. Apple Computer, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided March 12, 2008No. C 07-04486 SBA. Docket No. 38PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, District Judge.
REQUEST BEFORE THE COURT
Before the Court is defendant AT & T Mobility, LLC’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Dismiss Claims Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (the “Motion”) [Docket No. 38]. Defendant AT & T Mobility, LLC (“AT & T”), under the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., seeks to compel plaintiffs, Zoltán and Ynez Stiener to individually arbitrate their disputes, regarding allegedly hidden and substantial battery-changing and related charges associated with using their iPhones, under the Arbitration Agreement…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. CasarottoSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Connie A. Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc. The American Arbitration AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Preston v. FerrerSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Discover Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
- Catherine Ingle v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., a Virginia CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re Apple & AT & TM Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2008
- Arguelles-Romero v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Blessing v. Sirius XM Radio Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- McArdle v. AT & T MOBILITY LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2009
- Dalie v. Pulte Home Corp.District Court, E.D. California · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.