Jackson v. Tesla, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ROY JACKSON, Case No. 24-cv-06110-WHO Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
v. COMPEL AND STAY TESLA, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 9 and 10 Defendants. 11 Defendant Tesla, Inc. moves to compel the claims asserted by plaintiff Roy Jackson – based on disability discrimination and wage and hour violations – to arbitration and stay this case. Dkt. No. 10. The motion to compel and stay is GRANTED. Jackson does not dispute that when he accepted Tesla’s offer of employment, he signed both an Offer Letter and separately an Arbitration Agreement. Declaration of Ben Flesch (Dkt. No. 11), Ex. A (Dkt. No. 11-1 “Offer Letter”), Ex. B (“Arbitration Agreement.”). The Arbitration Agreement covers all claims “related to” his employment with Tesla. But he opposes the motion to compel and stay, arguing that the Arbitration Agreement is both procedurally and substantively unconscionable. Dkt. No. 16. Whether a contract is unconscionable is a…