In Jallo v. Midland Funding, LLC, 2014 WL 5810203 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Benitez enforced an arbitration clause in a credit card agreement and ordered an FDCPA/Rosenthal Act class action to arbitration.
The arbitration clause in dispute is broad. See Simula, Inc. v. Autolive, Inc., 175 F.3d 716, 720–21 (9th Cir.1999) (construing “all disputes arising in connection with” language as broad). It contemplates “[a]ny and all claims, disputes or controversies of any nature whatsoever … arising out of, relating to, or in connection with: (a) this Agreement.” (Ex. C § 20). This language encompasses Mr. Jallo’s claims. The dispute in this case revolves around Defendants’ ability to charge interest on the Account, even after the Account has been “charged off.” The Agreement contains the assignment clause, the governing law provision, and the modification clauses discussed above. The Agreement, specifically the assignment clause, put Mr. Jallo on notice that his unpaid debt could be sold to a third party, for example, Midland Funding; and the third party would be entitled to all of the rights listed in the Agreement, including the ability to charge interest. ( See Ex. C §§ 18, 24). The broad language of the arbitration clause subjects to arbitration any claim arising out of the Agreement and against an assignee of the Agreement. Thus, Defendants have the right to invoke arbitration for any dispute arising out of Mr. Jallo’s Account. The Court finds the agreement to arbitrate governs Mr. Jallo’s claims against Defendants.