United States Ninth Circuit

When the crux of a complaint is not the invalidity or enforceability of a contract as a whole, but rather an arbitration provision within the contract itself, then the federal courts, as opposed to an arbitrator, must decide whether the arbitration provision is invalid and unenforceable under 9 U.S.C. section 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/04/2006
• Published 12/04/2006

Judges

• Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, REINHARDT, KOZINSKI, O'SCANNLAIN, THOMAS, GRABER, WARDLAW, FISHER, GOULD, TALLMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Kate Gordon & Leslie A. Bailey, Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, Oakland, CA;  F. Paul Bland, Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, Washington, D.C.;  Sanford M. Cipinko, Law Offices of Sanford M. Cipinko, San Francisco, CA, for the plaintiff-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Glenn J. Plattner and Christine S. Oh, Jenkens & Gilchrist, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for the defendant-appellee MailCoups, Inc., John S. Warnlof, Warnlof & Sumnick, Walnut Creek, CA;  Shirley M. Hufstedler, Morrison & Foerster, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for the defendant-appellee, American Arbitration Association.