Borodaenko
Borodaenko v. Twitter, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 DMITRY BORODAENKO, et al., Case No. 22-cv-07226-HSG
Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
COMPEL ARBITRATION AND
v. GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
TWITTER, INC., Re: Dkt. Nos. 14, 15 Defendant.
12 Pending before the Court are Defendant Twitter, Inc.’s motion to compel arbitration and motion to dismiss. Dkt. Nos. 14, 15. The Court finds these matters appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matters are deemed submitted. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons detailed below, the Court GRANTS the motion to compel arbitration and GRANTS the motion to dismiss. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Dmitry Borodaenko and Abhijit Mehta initially filed this putative class action in November 2022, Dkt. No. 1, and amended their complaint a month later in December 2022. See Dkt. No. 8 (“FAC”). Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of former Twitter employees who (1) are disabled, or were either on…