Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 22STCV10381, Date: 2022-12-19 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV10381 Hearing Date: December 19, 2022 Dept: 29
TENTATIVE
Defendants unopposed motion to compel arbitration is GRANTED. The Court GRANTS Defendant Uber’s request to stay this action.
Legal Standard
“California law reflects a strong
public policy in favor of arbitration as a relatively quick and inexpensive
method for resolving disputes. To further that policy, section 1281.2
requires a trial court to enforce a written arbitration agreement unless one of
three limited exceptions applies. Those statutory exceptions arise where
(1) a party waives the right to arbitration; (2) grounds exist for revoking the
arbitration agreement; and (3) pending litigation with a third party creates
the possibility of conflicting rulings on common factual or legal
issues.” (Acquire II, Ltd. v. Colton Real Estate Group (2013) 213
Cal.App.4th 959, 967 [citations omitted]; Code Civ. Proc. §
1281.2.)
In deciding a petition to compel
arbitration, trial courts must decide first whether an enforceable arbitration
agreement exists between the parties, and then determine the second gateway
issue whether the claims are covered within the scope of the agreement. (Omar
v. Ralphs Grocery Co. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 955, 961; see also Pinnacle
Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55
Cal.4th 223, 236 [“[g]eneral principles of contract law govern whether parties
have entered a binding agreement to arbitrate”].) The opposing party has the
burden to establish any defense to enforcement. (Gatton v. T—Mobile USA, Inc.
(2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 571, 579 [“The petitioner, T—Mobile here, bears the
burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement and the
opposing party, plaintiffs here, bears the burden of proving any fact necessary
to its defense.”])
“If a court of competent jurisdiction, whether in this State
or not, has ordered arbitration of a controversy which is an issue involved in
an action or proceeding pending before a court of this State, the court in
which such action or proceeding is pending shall, upon motion of a party to
such action or proceeding, stay the action or proceeding until an arbitration
is had in accordance with the order to arbitrate or until such earlier time as
the court specifies.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.4(a).)
Discussion
a.
A valid agreement to arbitrate
between the parties exists.
Defendant Uber’s records show that
Plaintiff’s rider account was created via the Rider App on a smartphone using
iOS operating system. (Buoscio Decl. ¶ 8,
Ex. A; Gabriel Decl. ¶¶ 3, 4.) Plaintiff could not have completed the
registration process via the Rider App and taken any rides using this account
via the Rider App, without completing the registration steps, each of which
involved a single screen on the user’s smartphone. (Gabriel Decl. ¶¶ 4, 5, Ex. C, D, E.) These
steps include: (1) entering a mobile number; (2) entering a four digit mobile
verification code, (3) entering an email address; (4) entering a password; (5)
creating a profile by entering first and last name; and (6) agreeing to
Defendant Uber’s Terms. (Ibid.) On the first page of the Terms
under section one, the following is stated:
IMPORTANT:
PLEASE REVIEW THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT SET FORTH BELOW CAREFULLY, AS IT WILL REQUIRE YOU TO RESOLVE
DISPUTES WITH UBER ON AN INDIVIDUAL
BASIS THROUGH FINAL AND BINDING ARBITRATION. BY ENTERING THIS AGREEMENT, YOU EXPRESSLY
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND
ALL OF THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND HAVE TAKEN TIME TO CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS
IMPORTANT DECISION.
(Buoscio Decl., ¶ 9, Ex. B, Section 1
(emphasis in original).)
Further, on
page two of the Terms, an Arbitration Agreement provision provides as follows:
You and Uber agree that any dispute, claim
or controversy arising out of or relating to
(a) these Terms or the existence,
breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation
or validity thereof, or (b) your access to or use of the Services at any time, whether before or after the
date you agreed to the Terms, will be settled by binding arbitration between you and Uber, and not in a
court of law.
(Buoscio Decl., ¶ 9, Ex. B, Section 2).
Accordingly,
Defendant Uber has met its initial burden of showing that a valid
agreement to arbitrate between the parties exists between the parties.
b.
The Arbitration Agreement covers the
controversy or controversies at issue in the parties’ dispute.
Plaintiff brought a complaint alleging negligence against
Defendant Uber. The complaint alleges, “on
or about March 27, 2020, PLAINTIFF was a rider/passenger for Defendant UBER
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; in a vehicle that was authorized to transport individuals
such as plaintiff. PLAINTIFF was a backseat passenger and paid Defendant UBER
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. to transport him to a destination.” (Plaintiff’s Complaint ¶
8). Plaintiff further alleges that “As a result of Defendants’ inattentiveness
and failures, PLAINTIFF sustained injuries to his physical well being.”
(Plaintiff’s Complaint ¶ 9).
Accordingly,
Defendant Uber has met its burden of showing that Plaintiff’s claims arise from
the use of Defendant Uber’s services and are within the scope of the
Arbitration Agreement. The burden shifts to Plaintiff to demonstrate any
defense to enforcement, however Plaintiff has not raised any defense, let alone
filed an opposition.
c.
The instant
action is stayed as to Defendant Uber to permit Plaintiff and Defendant Uber to
arbitrate Plaintiff’s claims.
Defendant Uber
requests this Court stay this action until the conclusion of the
arbitration. Because the Court orders
Plaintiff to submit to binding arbitration, the Court grants Defendant Uber’s
request to stay this action.
Conclusion
The
Court GRANTS Defendant Uber’s motion to compel arbitration.
The Court GRANTS
Defendant Uber’s request to stay this action.