QAI, Inc. v. Sprint Communications, Co.

Good Law
120 F. Supp. 2d 1218·2000 WL 1721090·2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17053
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2000SA CV 00-958 AHS (EEx)California3,921 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stotler, J.

OPINION ON ORDER DENYING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

I.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs, Cheetah Communications (“Cheetah”) and QAI, Inc. (“QAI”), moved for a preliminary injunction to enjoin defendant Sprint Communications Company (“Sprint”) from terminating service during the period in which the parties would be resolving a billing dispute in an arbitration already filed with the American Arbitration Association and pending in Kansas City, Missouri. Plaintiffs’ application for a preliminary injunction raised the question of whether a district court, located outside the situs in which the parties have agreed to arbitrate any disputes arising from the parties’ contract, may exercise jurisdiction in order to maintain the “status quo” pending completion of the arbitration. The Court denied relief to plaintiffs on the ground that the parties’ contract controlled their relations, since that document specified that all “disputes arising or relating” thereto shall be submitted to arbitration in Missouri, arbitration was already pending there, and the plaintiffs’ remedy, if any, lay in the parties’ chosen venue.

II.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Cheetah is a “switchless reseller” of long…

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.