McArdle

McArdle v. AT & T MOBILITY LLC

Good Law
657 F. Supp. 2d 1140·2009 WL 2969463·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89231
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 14, 2009C 09-1117 CWCalifornia4,201 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilken, J.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE ANSWER

Plaintiff Steven McArdle charges Defendants AT & T Mobility LLC, New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. with unlawfully imposing certain fees in connection with providing cellular telephone services. Defendants now move for an order compelling Plaintiff to submit his claims to binding arbitration pursuant to the terms of a service agreement between the parties. Plaintiff opposes the motion and moves to strike a number of defenses from the answer. The matters were heard on September 3, 2009. Having considered oral argument and all of the papers submitted by the parties, the Court denies Defendants’ motion and grants Plaintiffs motion in part and denies it in part.

BACKGROUND

AT & T Mobility is a cellular telephone service provider. It owns New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. Plaintiff is a customer of AT & T’s.

According to the complaint, Defendants impose the following charges, among others, on customers who turn on their phones outside the United States: 1) a…

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.