Perez v. Discover Bank

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: August 23, 2021
• Docket: 3:20-cv-06896
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ILIANA PEREZ, et al., Case No. 20-cv-06896-SI

8 Plaintiffs, ORDER RE AUGUST 27, 2021 9 v. HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL 10 DISCOVER BANK, ARBITRATION 11 Defendant.

12 13 The Court will hear oral argument on defendant Discover Bank’s motion to compel 14 arbitration on August 27, 2021. 15 The parties shall be prepared to discuss the application of the following caselaw to 16 defendant’s motion to compel arbitration: 17 • John Wiley & Sons v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543, 557-58 (1964) (“Once it is determined . . . 18 that the parties are obligated to submit the subject matter of a dispute to arbitration, 19 ‘procedural’ questions which grow out of the dispute and bear on its final disposition should 20 be left to the arbitrator.”); 21 • Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 84 (2002) (“the presumption is that the 22 arbitrator should decide allegation[s] of waiver, delay, or a like defense to arbitrability.”) 23 (internal quotation and citation omitted); 24 • Retail Delivery Drivers, Driver Salesman, Produce Workers & Helpers Local 588 v. 25 Servomation Corp., 717 F.2d 475, 477 (9th Cir. 1983) (“[Wiley] and later cases suggest a 26 number of reasons for passing an entire dispute to the arbitrator, principal among them being 27 the desirability of deferring to someone familiar with the practices in the industry and the 1 e Pack Concrete, Inc. v. Cunningham, 866 F.2d 283, 285-86 (9th Cir. 1989) (“interpreting the 2 issue submitted often requires construction of the agreement itself, a job clearly for the 3 arbitrator.”). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: August 23, 2021 Site WU tee 6 □□ SUSAN ILLSTON 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 a 12

15 16

it

4 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28