Miriam Garcia v. U.S. Bancorp

MEMORANDUM

Defendants U.S. Bancorp and U.S. Bank appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to compel arbitration. We have jurisdiction under 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1)(B), and we affirm.

1.On the basis of the undisputed facts, the district court found that the bank representative’s description of the signature card as a document for “obtaining] the bank atm card” failed to convey the true meaning of the signature card’s terms; that Garcia’s reliance on that description was reasonable; and that Garcia did not “consent to the terms in the Deposit Account Agreement,” so “a valid agreement to arbitrate was never formed between the parties.” The signature card purported to bind Garcia to a 50-page single-spaced document of terms and conditions, Garcia told the bank representative that she was unable to read or understand English and she expressly requested translated versions of the documents presented to her. Under these circumstances, the district court’s findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, and, because the absence of mutual assent meant no contract was formed, the arbitration clause in the purported agreement was of no force or effect. See Rosenthal v. Great W. Fin.…