Nottbohm
Nottbohm v. Tesla, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JORMA NOTTBOHM, Case No. 23-cv-05171-JD
Plaintiff,
ORDER RE ARBITRATION
v.
TESLA, INC., Defendant.
12 Defendant Tesla, Inc., asks to compel arbitration of plaintiff Jorma Nottbohm’s employment discrimination claims before the JAMS arbitration service pursuant to an employment contract. Dkt. No. 18. Nottbohm signed a contract with an arbitration clause that expressly requires the parties to arbitrate employment-related disputes at JAMS. Dkt. No. 18-2, Exh. A at ECF p. 7. Nottbohm has not provided a good reason to bypass this commitment. Consequently, the case is ordered to arbitration. See Williams v. Eaze Sols., Inc., 417 F. Supp. 3d 1233 (N.D. Cal. 2019); Cornet v. Twitter, Inc., No. 22-cv-06857-JD, 2023 WL 187498, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2023). Nottbohm’s suggestion that Tesla waived arbitration is not well taken. Nottbohm started this action by filing an arbitration demand with JAMS. He says Tesla ignored the demand after being served by…