Kumar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PRAVEEN NARRA KUMAR, et al., Case No. 21-cv-09141-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART PETITION FOR

ARBITRATION AND DENYING

SKYHOP GLOBAL, LLC, et al., MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 1, 37,

The petition to compel arbitration is granted in part and denied in part.1 Because the parties have delegated questions about the scope of arbitrability to the arbitrator by reference to the AAA rules, the Court leaves unresolved whether the arbitration clause covers the claims in this case. See Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 1125, 1130–31 (9th Cir. 2015). 1. The claims between Indyzen, Narra, SkyHop Tech, and Scotto are compelled to arbitration because of the arbitration provision in the June 2020 Development Agreement. See Dkt. No. 1, Exh. H.2 Indyzen may enforce that agreement as a principal bound by the signature of its authorized agent, Narra. Narra may enforce the agreement as Indyzen’s agent. See Dryer v. Los Angeles Rams, 40 Cal. 3d 406, 418 (1985). SkyHop Tech is bound to the agreement by the signature of its authorized agent, Scotto,…