Seneca

Seneca v. Homeaglow Inc

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 202524-887California1,303 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SETH SENECA; LISA ANDOH, No. 24-887 individually on behalf of themselves and all D.C. No. others similarly situated, 8:23-cv-02308-CJC-ADS Plaintiffs - Appellees,

MEMORANDUM*

v.

HOMEAGLOW INC., a Delaware corporation doing business as Dazzling Cleaning,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted March 3, 2025 Pasadena, California

Before: SANCHEZ and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and LIBURDI, District Judge.**

Homeaglow Inc. appeals the district court’s denial of its motion to compel

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Michael T. Liburdi, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation. arbitration. The district court found that Homeaglow did not present its “Terms…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.