Pyramid Travel, Inc. v. Sri Lankan Travel, Inc.

*72 MEMORANDUM *

Pyramid Travel, Inc. (“Pyramid”) argues that the district court erred by reading the arbitration clause in the parties’ agreement expansively, resulting in a determination that the libel claims be arbitrated. The clause at issue is at least as expansive as phrases such as “arising out of or relating to” or “all disputes arising in connection with this Agreement,” which are liberally interpreted. See Simula, Inc. v. Autoliv, Inc., 175 F.3d 716, 720 (9th Cir.1999). The district court correctly found that the libel action “touch[ed] matter” contained in the agreement and was, therefore, subject to the agreement to arbitrate. See id. at 721 .

The district court also correctly held that individual plaintiffs Mokshinder Singh (“Singh”) and Rajinder Mahal (“Mahal”) were subject to the arbitration agreement because of the nature of their claim, which stated that Singh and Mahal were the persona or public face of Pyramid.

SriLankan Airlines Limited (“Sri-Lankan Airlines”) did not waive the right to arbitrate. See Van Ness Townhouses v. Mar Indus. Corp., 862 F.2d 754 ; 758 (9th Cir.1989); Lake Communications, Inc. v. ICC Corp., 738 F.2d 1473, 1477 (9th Cir.1984).…