Grant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JEFFREY GRANT, Case No. 22-cv-04434-JD

Plaintiff,

ORDER RE ARBITRATION

v.

PAR, INC. et al., Defendants.

In this case challenging the manner in which defendants repossessed plaintiff’s car, defendant PAR, Inc. has moved to compel arbitration. Dkt. No. 42. The parties’ familiarity with the record is assumed, and arbitration is denied. “Arbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.” AT & T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers of America, 475 U.S. 643, 648 (1986) (quotations and citation omitted). PAR acknowledges that it “had no direct contract with plaintiff” and “hence is not a signatory to an arbitration provision” with plaintiff. Dkt. No. 42 at 9. Even so, PAR says that it may compel arbitration as an “agent of Santander” under the arbitration clause in plaintiff’s Retail Installment Sale Contract, id. at 10. The point is not well taken.…