Luckert
Luckert v. Tesla Energy Operations, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ANTHONY W. LUCKERT, et al., Case No. 21-cv-03027-VC
Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
v. COMPEL ARBITRATION
TESLA ENERGY OPERATIONS, INC., et Re: Dkt. No. 22 al., Defendants.
Tesla’s motion to compel arbitration is granted. The Power Purchase Agreement entered into by the Luckerts and Tesla incorporates the JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules into its arbitration provision. The applicable rule provides: “Jurisdictional and arbitrability disputes, including disputes over the formation, existence, validity, interpretation or scope of the agreement under which Arbitration is sought…shall be submitted to and ruled on by the Arbitrator.” That type of language has been held to “clearly and unmistakably” delegate the question of arbitrability to the arbitrator under Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 1125, 1128 (9th Cir. 2015); see Oracle America, Inc. v. Myriad Group A.G., 724 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2013); Rohm Semiconductor USA, LLC v. MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc., No. 20-cv-06686-VC, 2021 WL 822932 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2021); Caviani v. Mentor Graphics Corp., No. 19-CV-01645- EMC, 2019 WL…