Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 22NWCV01236, Date: 2023-09-12 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV01236, Date: 2023-09-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV01236 Hearing Date: September 12, 2023 Dept: C

TIAN v. LIU

CASE NO.: 22NWCV01236

HEARING: 9/12/23

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendants Weee! Inc., Liu, and Yan’s unopposed petition to compel arbitration is GRANTED. The action is STAYED as to the remaining parties pending arbitration.

Moving Parties to give NOTICE.

Defendants Weee! Inc., Liu, and Yan move to compel arbitration pursuant to CCP § 1281.2.

Complaint

Plaintiff Yanfei Tian alleges that he was wrongfully accused of failing to use the timecard through Weee’s Samsara APP because the Samsara was not functioning properly. (Complaint, ¶ 31.) Based thereon, the Complaint asserts causes of action for:

1. Breach of Employment Contract

2. Wrongful Termination

3. Retaliation

4. Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

5. Promissory Estoppel

6. IIED

Arbitration Agreement

Parties may be compelled to arbitrate a dispute upon the court finding that: (1) there was a valid agreement to arbitrate between the parties; and (2) said agreement covers the controversy or controversies in the parties’ dispute.¿(Omar v. Ralphs Grocery Co. (2004)¿118 Cal.App.4th 955, 961.) A party moving to compel arbitration has the burden of establishing the existence of a valid agreement to arbitrate and the party opposing the petition has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, any fact necessary to its defense. (Banner Entertainment, Inc. v. Superior Court¿(1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 348, 356-357.)

Here, Defendants present evidence that Plaintiff signed an Arbitration Agreement with Defendant Weee! Inc.. (Shen Decl., Exs. A-B.) Defendants Liu and Yan are employed by Weee! Plaintiff failed to oppose the petition.

Accordingly, the petition is GRANTED. The action is STAYED as to the remaining parties pending arbitration.