Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_09-cv-00264/USCOURTS-azd-4_09-cv-00264-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 29:621 Job Discrimination (Age)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Deborah Bormann, a single woman,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Waxie Enterpirses, Inc., dba Waxie 

Sanitary Supply,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-264-TUC-FRZ

ORDER

Plaintiff Deborah Bormann filed her original Complaint for wrongful termination

based on age discrimination in violation of A.R.S. § 41-1461, et seq., against Defendant

Waxie Enterprises in state court. Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on March 2,

2009, adding a claim for violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).

Defendant removed this action to federal court on May 8, 2009. 

On May 13, 2009, Defendant filed its “Petition to Compel Arbitration and Motion to

Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, Stay Action Pending Arbitration,” to which Plaintiff filed her

an opposition. 

This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Glenda E. Edmonds for all pretrial

proceedings and report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1) and LRCiv 72.1 and LRCiv 72.2 of the Rules of Practice of the United States

District Court for the District of Arizona. 

Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate

Judge Edmonds, filed July 8, 2009, recommending that the Court, after its independent

Case 4:09-cv-00264-FRZ Document 18 Filed 03/31/10 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

1

Declaration of Amy Rumbin in Support of Petition to Compel Arbitration, Exhibit

A. 

- 2 -

review of the record, grant in part, Defendant’s petition to compel arbitration and motion to

dismiss. 

The Report and Recommendation specifically recommends that the Court grant the

motion to compel arbitration and motion to dismiss, but void as “substantively

unconscionable,” the provisions in the arbitration agreement restricting punitive damages,

the award of attorneys’ costs and fees, and the choice of venue provision. 

The Report and Recommendation includes a thorough analysis of the legal authority

and issues raised in the motion to compel arbitration and the remedy consistent with its

findings and severance of the unconscionable provisions in the employment letter

agreement.1

Plaintiff filed her objections to the Report and Recommendation, arguing summarily,

that the arbitration agreement is substantively unconscionable requiring denial of the request

to sever or rewrite the agreement and denial of the motion to compel arbitration. Plaintiff

argues that her Amended Complaint should move forward in federal court against the

Defendant. In the alternative, Plaintiff moves for reconsideration. 

In response, Defendant requests that the Court enter an order consistent with the

Report and Recommendation. 

The Court finds, after careful consideration of the matters presented and an

independent review of the record herein, that the petition to compel arbitration should be

granted in accordance with the findings of the Magistrate Judge set forth in the Report and

Recommendation.

Based on the foregoing, 

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Edmond’s Report and Recommendation

[Doc. #13] is hereby ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions

of law by this Court;

Case 4:09-cv-00264-FRZ Document 18 Filed 03/31/10 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 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Petition to Compel Arbitration [Doc.

#6] is GRANTED, in part, with the provisions restricting punitive damages, award of

attorney’s costs and fees, and the choice of venue hereby voided, in accordance with the

Report and Recommendation;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is dismissed. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment

accordingly.

DATED this 31st day of March, 2010.

Case 4:09-cv-00264-FRZ Document 18 Filed 03/31/10 Page 3 of 3