Summary
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied Macy's motion to compel arbitration in a wage-and-hour class action brought by a former employee. The court held that the plaintiff was a transportation worker engaged in interstate commerce and therefore exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act under 9 U.S.C. § 1. The court maintained the scheduled case management conference, subject to possible vacatur if Macy's appeals and seeks a stay.
Holdings
- Plaintiff was a transportation worker engaged in interstate commerce and was therefore exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act under 9 U.S.C. § 1.
- Macy's motion to compel arbitration was denied because Plaintiff falls within the FAA's Section 1 transportation-worker exemption.
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff was a transportation worker engaged in interstate commerce and therefore exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act under 9 U.S.C. § 1.
- Whether Macy's supplemental evidence created a factual dispute regarding the interstate nature of the merchandise Plaintiff handled sufficient to support compelling arbitration.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (2)
- Ortiz v. Randstad Inhouse Servs., LLC, 95 F.4th 1152, 1163 (9th Cir. 2024)(applied)
- Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, 599 U.S. 736, 747 (2023)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…