Keeton

I. BACKGROUND

Keeton began working for Tesla in 2017 as a production associate. She signed an employment agreement that contained an arbitration provision. It provided, among other things, that all disputes regarding her employment be resolved by binding arbitration conducted by the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. (JAMS) “under the then current rules of JAMS for employment disputes.” In August 2021, Keeton filed a complaint against Tesla asserting claims for harassment, race-based discrimination, failure to prevent harassment and discrimination, and retaliation. Thereafter, the parties stipulated to submit the dispute to binding arbitration before JAMS. The court granted the stipulation and stayed the action pending completion of arbitration. A few months later, Keeton submitted her demand for arbitration to JAMS. Both parties paid a filing fee to commence the arbitration. On February 25, 2022, JAMS sent the parties a letter confirming the appointment of an arbitrator and seeking payment of a deposit for “all pre- hearing work.” The letter said payment was “due upon receipt.” Over the next month, JAMS sent four additional letters to the parties stating that…