UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY W. LUCKERT, et al., Case No. 21-cv-03027-VC

Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO v. COMPEL ARBITRATION

TESLA ENERGY OPERATIONS, INC., et Re: Dkt. No. 22 al., Defendants.

Tesla’s motion to compel arbitration is granted. The Power Purchase Agreement entered into by the Luckerts and Tesla incorporates the JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules into its arbitration provision. The applicable rule provides: “Jurisdictional and arbitrability disputes, including disputes over the formation, existence, validity, interpretation or scope of the agreement under which Arbitration is sought…shall be submitted to and ruled on by the Arbitrator.” That type of language has been held to “clearly and unmistakably” delegate the question of arbitrability to the arbitrator under Brennan v. Opus Bank,

(9th Cir. 2015); see Oracle America, Inc. v. Myriad Group A.G.,

(9th Cir. 2013); Rohm Semiconductor USA, LLC v. MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc., No. 20-cv-06686-VC,

(N.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2021); Caviani v. Mentor Graphics Corp., No. 19-CV-01645- EMC,

(N.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2019). Tesla’s motion is thus granted, and the case is dismissed without prejudice. See Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale's, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2014). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 5, 2021 Lo. we VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge