Kahl
Kahl v. Match Group, LLC
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
KRISTA KAHL, et al., Case No. 23-cv-00985-AGT
Plaintiffs,
ORDER ON MOTION TO COMPEL
v. ARBITRATION
PLENTYOFFISH MEDIA, ULC, Re: Dkt. No. 13 Defendant.
Plentyoffish Media ULC has moved to compel the plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims. The plaintiffs allege that Plentyoffish Media violated California law by “restrict[ing] the age range for potential matches” on the Plenty of Fish dating app. FAC ¶ 20. The plaintiffs all agreed to Plentyoffish Media’s terms of use when they created accounts on the dating app. See Dkt. 13-1, Gradin Decl. ¶¶ 2–8. Those terms included an arbitration agreement, but the plaintiffs contend that the arbitration agreement is unconscionable and shouldn’t be enforced. See Opp’n, Dkt. 14 at 6–11. Unconscionability is a “gateway” issue, which is traditionally resolved in court before arbitration commences. Brennan v. Opus Bank, 796 F.3d 1125, 1130 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 84 (2002)). But the parties to an arbitration agreement can agree “to arbitrate a gateway issue.” Rent-A-Ctr., W., Inc. v.…