Hernandez
Carmax Auto Superstores California LLC v. Hernandez
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Morrow, J.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
On November 12, 2014, CarMax Auto Superstores California LLC (“CarMax”) filed a petition for an order compelling arbitration under § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 4 ; it also sought a stay of state court proceedings arising out of its dispute with Rosella Michelle Hernandez. 1 Hernandez filed a motion to dismiss CarMax’s petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on December *1085 3, 2014, 2 and on December 30, 2014, Car-Max filed a motion to compel arbitration and stay the state court proceedings. 3 Both motions are opposed.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
A. Facts Alleged in the Petition
CarMax alleges that, beginning in 2002, it employed Hernandez as a Management Assistant. 5 It asserts that, at the time Hernandez applied for employment at Car-Max, she executed a Dispute Resolution Agreement (“DRA”). 6 CarMax attaches a copy of the DRA executed by Hernandez to its petition. 7 The DRA states, in relevant part:
The DRA requires the applicant to “file a claim for arbitration within one (1)' year of the day on which [she] know[s] or, through reasonable…