Williams v. Eaze Solutions, Inc.

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 FARRAH WILLIAMS, Case No. 3:18-cv-02598-JD

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER RE ARBITRATION

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 17 10 EAZE SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant. 11

12 13 In this putative class action, plaintiff Farrah Williams alleges that defendant Eaze Solutions 14 violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227, by sending her 15 unsolicited, autodialed text messages. Eaze seeks to compel arbitration of her claims pursuant to 16 its terms of service. Dkt. No. 17. While the case raises interesting issues about 17 “ganjapreneurship” and the budding legal marijuana industry, the questions presently before the 18 Court are limited to whether there was an agreement to arbitrate and, if so, whether the Court or an 19 arbitrator decides the arbitrability of plaintiff’s claims. 20 After an initial set of briefing on the motion to compel and oral argument, the Court called 21 for supplemental submissions from the parties on the application of Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. 22 v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440…