In Coneff v. AT&T, No. 09-35563 (9th Cir. March 16, 2012), Plaintiffs are current and former customers of defendants, New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., and AT&T Mobility, LLC (“AT&T”). Plaintiffs filed a class action against AT&T, which responded by seeking to enforce an arbitration agreement contained in its contracts with Plaintiffs.
The service agreement requires individualized arbitration of “all disputes and claims,” and it prohibits both class actions and class arbitrations. It also contained a choice-of-law clause that selected the law of the state in which an individual plaintiff ’s billing address is located.
The district court refused to enforce the arbitration agreement on state-law unconscionability grounds, relying primarily on the agreement’s class-action waiver provision. AT&T now appeals.
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s substantive unconscionability ruling and remanded for further proceedings related to Plaintiffs’ procedural unconscionability claims.
Related Posts
Ninth Circuit Finds Class Action Waiver Unconscionable
Eleventh Circuit Rules that Delegation Provision is Valid under the Federal Arbitration Act
Eleventh Circuit Rules that the Plaintiff’s Act of Amending its Complaint May Allow a Defendant to Resurrect its Previously-Waived Right to Arbitrate
AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion | Blawgosphere Round-up on Class Arbitration Decision 
Guest Post Part II.A | AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion: Can Discover Bank Withstand Stolt-Nielsen Scrutiny? 
Prawfsblawg: Allocating Power Between Courts and Arbitrators – and Why Scholars of Federal Courts Should Care
