Shawn Esparza, on behalf of herself, and all others similarly situated v. Smartpay Leasing, Inc.

17-17175Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMar 21, 2019

Full text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHAWN ESPARZA, on behalf of herself,
and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SMARTPAY LEASING, INC.,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-17175
D.C. No. 3:17-cv-03421-WHA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William Alsup, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 15, 2019**
San Francisco, California
Before: W. FLETCHER, WATFORD, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
This is an action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”),
47 U.S.C. § 227, filed by Shawn Esparza against SmartPay Leasing, Inc. SmartPay
appeals from the district court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration. We have
* 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).
FILED
MAR 21 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal under 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(C), and affirm.
The district court correctly held the TCPA claims in this case are not subject
to the arbitration clause in the cell-phone lease agreement between Esparza and
SmartPay. The arbitration clause applies only to claims “arising from or in any way
related to” the lease agreement. Esparza’s claims do not arise from or relate to the
lease. See United States ex rel. Welch v. My Left Foot Children’s Therapy, LLC,
871 F.3d 791, 798–99 (9th Cir. 2017). At most, her claims involve a website
participation agreement which authorized SmartPay to send certain text messages to
Esparza. The participation agreement does not have an arbitration clause. See
Samson v. NAMA Holdings, LLC, 637 F.3d 915, 923 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[A]rbitration
is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any
dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.” (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted)).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.