J.M. and M.M., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. MULTI MEDIA, LLC d/b/a CHATURBATE

Opinion

J.M. and M.M., on behalf of themselves Case No.: 3:25-cv-01672-CAB-SBC and all others similarly situated, ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL Plaintiffs, v. MULTI MEDIA, LLC d/b/a CHATURBATE, Defendant. “Regardless of whether a party finds and cites to relevant authority, this Court has an independent duty to research and properly apply the law.” Baylon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 303 F. Supp. 3d 1160, 1165 (D.N.M. 2018). Here, the Court has identified two relevant cases—Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC, 61 Cal. 4th 899 (2015) and Tompkins v. 23andMe, Inc., 840 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2016)—which neither Party cites concerning whether a fee-shifting provision in a consumer-related arbitration agreement is unconscionable. /// /// The Court therefore ORDERS that each party submit a supplemental brief of no more than three (3) pages by May 22, 2026 regarding these two cases and whether, or how, they apply to the fee-shifting provision here. Itis SO ORDERED. Dated: May 4, 2026 © Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo United States District Judge