Martina Hernandez, an individual, appearing individually v. Dmsi Staffing, LLC; Ross Stores, Inc.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARTINA HERNANDEZ, an individual,
appearing individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DMSI STAFFING, LLC; ROSS STORES,
INC.,
Defendants-Appellants.
No. 15-15366
D.C. No. 3:14-cv-01531-EMC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Edward M. Chen, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2017**
San Francisco, California
Before: BERZON and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges, and LASNIK,*** District Judge.
FILED
FEB 16 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
*** The Honorable Robert S. Lasnik, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Washington, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

Defendants DMSI Staffing, LLC and Ross Stores, Inc. appeal the district
court’s order denying their motion to compel arbitration of Martina Hernandez’s
representative California Labor Code Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”)
claim. The Defendants argue Hernandez is bound by her agreement with her
employers to arbitrate all disputes regarding her employment on an individual
basis.
Under California law, “an employment agreement [that] compels the waiver
of representative claims under the PAGA, [] is contrary to public policy and
unenforceable.” Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348, 384
(2014). The Iskanian rule is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act
(“FAA”). Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc., 803 F.3d 425, 427 (9th
Cir. 2015) (“[T]he Iskanian rule does not stand as an obstacle to the
accomplishment of the FAA’s objectives, and is not preempted.”); see also
Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 15-16178, 2016 WL 7470557, at *7 (9th
Cir. Sept. 7, 2016). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of
Defendants’ motion to compel individual arbitration of Hernandez’s PAGA claim.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --