Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01587/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01587-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 This matter is deemed suitable for decision without oral *

argument. E.D. Cal. R. 78-230(h).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEINYATEY CHAMBERS, )

)

Plaintiff, ) 2:09-cv-01587-GEB-JFM

)

v. ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

) MOTION TO REINSTATE CASE*

DOLLAR FINANCIAL GROUP a/k/a MONEY )

MART )

)

Defendant. )

)

On January 5, 2010, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Reinstate

Case.” (Docket No. 23.) Defendant opposes the motion, arguing

Plaintiff’s motion is unsupported, untimely and Plaintiff erroneously

argues that his claims cannot be submitted to arbitration in

accordance with the terms of the governing arbitration provision. 

 An order issued in this case on October 17, 2009, granting

Defendant’s unopposed motion to compel arbitration. The court

concluded in that order that Plaintiff’s claims alleged under the Fair

Debt Collection Practices Act and California’s Rosenthal Act were

covered by the arbitration provision included in the written loan

agreement executed by Plaintiff and Defendant on December 27, 2008. 

Therefore, Plaintiff’s claims were dismissed and this case was closed. 

Case 2:09-cv-01587-GEB -JFM Document 27 Filed 02/03/10 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Plaintiff argues in his pending motion, that his claims

against Defendant should be “reinstated” since Defendant’s “chosen

arbitration forum, the National Arbitration Forum (“NAF”), issued a

letter upon [Plaintiff’s] filing [of a claim, stating] that it no

longer accepts consumer claims for arbitration.” (Mot. to Reinstate ¶

5.) Plaintiff contends since “Defendant’s chosen forum, the [NAF],

cannot hear Plaintiff’s claim due to NAF’s inability to hear the type

of claim brought by Plaintiff, Defendant waived its right to compel

binding arbitration of Plaintiff’s cause of action.” (Id. ¶ 10.) 

Defendant counters that when Plaintiff failed to oppose its motion to

compel arbitration before this case was dismissed, Plaintiff waived

any right to object to arbitration; and further, Plaintiff has

provided no reason why his claims cannot be arbitrated under the terms

of the arbitration provision in the loan agreement.

Plaintiff’s motion is unsupported by authority, and has not

been shown to be timely. Further, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that

compliance with the arbitration provision in the parties’ loan

agreement is not possible. Nor has Plaintiff shown that his claims

must be arbitrated by the NAF. The arbitration clause states that

“[t]he arbitration hearing will be conducted in the county of

[Plaintiff’s] residence, or within 30 miles from such county, or in

the county in which [Plaintiff’s] loan transaction occurred.” (Nguyen

Decl., Ex. A.) The arbitration clause further provides that “any

dispute shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the rules

and procedures . . . of [the NAF] . . . applicable to consumer

disputes” and the “arbitrator shall apply applicable substantive law

consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act . . . .” (Id.) 

Therefore, the arbitration clause reveals that even though arbitration

Case 2:09-cv-01587-GEB -JFM Document 27 Filed 02/03/10 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

is to be conducted in compliance with the NAF’s rules and procedures,

it need not be conducted by the NAF. Plaintiff, therefore, has not

demonstrated that this court is a proper forum for his claims against

Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to reinstate his claims is

denied.

Dated: February 2, 2010

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:09-cv-01587-GEB -JFM Document 27 Filed 02/03/10 Page 3 of 3