Isozaki v. Resolute Capital Partners LTD

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DONALD ISOZAKI, Case No. 21-cv-091-YGR

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL v. ARBITRATION; DENYING MOTION FOR 9

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; AND DENYING 10 R etE aS lO ., LUTE CAPITAL PARTNERS, LTD. LLC, MOTION TO SEAL Dkt. Nos. 9, 12, 21 11 Defendants.

By its January 19, 2021 Order (Dkt. No. 26), the Court granted requests to hear, on 13 shortened time, the motion of plaintiff Donald Isozaki for preliminary injunction and the motion of 14 defendants Resolute Capital Partners LTD., LLC, et al. to compel arbitration. Those motions were 15 heard by the Court on February 2, 2021 by videoconference. 16 Having carefully considered the briefing and arguments submitted in this matter, and for 17 18 the reasons set forth in full detail on the record, the motion to compel arbitration is GRANTED and 19 the motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. The gateway issues of enforceability of an agreement to arbitrate and a dispute’s 20 arbitrability can reserved to the arbitrator where, as here, the arbitration rules “clearly and 21 unmistakably” delegated those decisions to the arbitrator. See Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 22 1125, 1130 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing AT & T Techs., Inc. v. Commc'ns Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643, 23 649 (1986). Moreover, plaintiff fails to show that enforcement of the arbitration agreement here 24 would be unconscionable, nor does he offer evidence that the agreement was a product of fraud. 25 See Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg., 388 U.S. 395, 403-404 (1967). Further, the 26 arbitration clause plainly covers all legal claims arising between (Isozaki) and all defendants as 27 1 defendants. 2 Because the matter must be compelled to arbitration, the motion for preliminary injunction 3 is DENIED. Moreover and in any event, as stated on the record, plaintiff failed to establish 4 || entitlement to the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction. See Great-W. Life & Annuity 5 Ins. Co, v. Knudson, 534 U.S. 204, 210 (2002) (injunctive relief generally unavailable to compel 6 || payment of money past due under a contract or specific performance of a past due monetary 7 obligation). 8 The administrative motion to file under seal, submitted in connection with the motion for 9 || preliminary injunction, (Dkt. No. 12) is DENIED. No supporting declaration was offered to 10 substantiate sealing of the arbitration demand. 11 This order terminates all pending motions. The matter is DISMISSED. 12 IT Is SO ORDERED.

13 Dated: February 9, 2021

v 14 VONNE GONZALEZ ROGER 45 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 & 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28