Rowland v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC et al

Filing 39

ORDER signed by District Judge Vince Chhabria on 4/9/19 GRANTING Motion to Compel Arbitration 6 . The case is dismissed without prejudice. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JAMES ROWLAND, Case No. 16-cv-02135-VC Plaintiff, v. CARMAX AUTO SUPERSTORES CALIFORNIA, LLC, et al., Defendants. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION; DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE Re: Dkt. No. 6 CarMax’s motion to compel arbitration is granted, and the case is dismissed without prejudice. Recognizing that Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018), forecloses his argument that class arbitration waivers are unenforceable, Rowland instead argues that compelling arbitration will violate his First and Fifth Amendment rights. But enforcement of an arbitration agreement under the Federal Arbitration Act does not qualify as state action, and Rowland therefore cannot challenge it on constitutional grounds. See Roberts v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 877 F.3d 833, 844-45 (2017). Rowland also contends that the parties’ Dispute Resolution Agreement is unconscionable. Even if requiring prospective employees to request a copy of supplemental dispute resolution rules creates a modicum of procedural unconscionability, the agreement is not substantively unconscionable. Rowland suggests that the agreement precludes employees from filing a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, but it in fact expressly preserves an employee’s right to seek relief from any government agency, including the NLRB. Nor is it clear that such a prohibition would render the entire agreement unenforceable. Cf. Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail N. Am, Inc., 803 F.3d 425, 440 (9th Cir. 2015). Absent a showing of substantive unconscionability, Rowland’s argument fails. See, e.g., Pinnacle Museum Tower Ass’n v. Pinnacle Mkt. Dev. (US), LLC, 55 Cal. 4th 223, 247 (2012). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 9, 2019 ______________________________________ VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?