Gilliam

Monex Deposit Co. v. Gilliam

Good Law
671 F. Supp. 2d 1137·2009 WL 4251131·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112089
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 24, 2009Case SACV 09-287 JVS(RNBx)California5,078 words

Opinion

Opinion

Selna, J.

ORDER RE MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

Counter Defendants Monex Deposit Company (“MDC”) and Monex Credit Company (“MCC”) (collectively, “Monex”) move the Court for an order compelling arbitration of Counter Plaintiff Richard Gilliam’s counterclaims and staying the counterclaims pending arbitration pursuant to 9 U.S.C. §§ 3 and 4. Richard Gilliam, who is proceeding pro se, opposes the motion. The Court GRANTS the motion.

I. Legal Standard

Under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., any party bound to an arbitration agreement that falls within the scope of the FAA may bring a motion in federal district court to compel arbitration and stay the proceeding pending resolution of the arbitration. Id. §§ 3, 4. The FAA eliminates district court discretion and requires the court to compel arbitration of issues covered by the arbitration agreement. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Byrd, 470 U.S. 213, 218 , 105 S.Ct. 1238 , 84 L.Ed.2d 158 (1985). The FAA limits the district court’s role to determining whether a valid agreement to arbitrate exists, and whether the agreement encompasses the disputes at issue. Chiron Corp. v. Ortho Diagnostic Sys., Inc., 207 F.3d 1126, 1130…

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.