Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 21STCV09151, Date: 2025-01-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV09151    Hearing Date: January 24, 2025    Dept: 74

Shalomov v. Cho

Defendant Airbnb, Inc.’s Motion to Stay Proceedings

BACKGROUND 

This motion arises from a personal injury action.

Plaintiff Yan Shalomov filed a complaint against defendants Grace Cho; The Cohost Company, LLC; Zachary Wood; Michelle Cho Wood; Brad Klopman; JTH MESA LLC; and Airbnb, Inc. (Airbnb) (collectively Defendants).

Airbnb filed a motion to compel arbitration on November 1, 2023.  The Court denied without prejudice Airbnb’s motion on September 25, 2024.

On December 11, 2024, Airbnb filed a renewed Motion to Compel Arbitration.

On December 26, 2024, Airbnb filed a Motion to Stay Proceedings pending the Court’s ruling on the Motion to Compel Arbitration and Airbnb’s Demurrer.

LEGAL STANDARD

            Under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) the Court shall stay any suit in which a Motion to Compel Arbitration is pending upon application of the party.  (9 U.S.C. § 3.)

DISCUSSION

            As a preliminary matter, Airbnb provides no authority compelling the Court to stay the proceedings pending a demurrer.

            Airbnb moves the Court to stay the proceedings pending its second motion to compel arbitration.  Airbnb’s initial motion to compel arbitration was denied without prejudice on September 25, 2024.

            Under the contract, the FAA controls both the substantive and procedural aspects of the arbitration agreement.  (Chor Decl., Ex. “B” [“This Arbitration Agreement evidences a transaction in interstate commerce and the Federal Arbitration Act governs all substantive and procedural interpretation and enforcement of this provision.”].)  Plaintiff alleges that Airbnb’s motion to compel arbitration is essentially a motion for reconsideration.

            Where a court denies a motion without prejudice to renewing it, the ensuing motion is not governed by the requirements for reconsideration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008.  (Clausing v. San Francisco Unif. School Dist. (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 1224, 1232.)  Given that the original motion to compel arbitration was denied without prejudice, the new Motion permits Airbnb to seek a new stay and the FAA supports a stay until the Court rules upon the motion to compel arbitration.  (See 9 U.S.C. § 3.)

            Plaintiff argues that Airbnb waived its right to a stay by participating in the action.  Airbnb is requesting a stay in discovery between Plaintiff and Airbnb.  Since being added as a defendant, Airbnb has filed two demurrers and two motions to compel arbitration.  Otherwise, Airbnb has largely not engaged in litigation.  Airbnb has not responded to Plaintiff’s discovery requests, nor does either party provide evidence that Airbnb has propounded discovery on Plaintiff.  Airbnb sought a motion to stay discovery only after Plaintiff propounded discovery.  The Court does not find that Airbnb’s actions constitute waiver of its right to seek a stay.

CONCLUSION

            The Court grants Defendant’s Motion to Stay Proceedings as to Airbnb, Inc.