Isozaki v. Resolute Capital Partners LTD

Background

Plaintiff Donald Isozaki sought a preliminary injunction. Defendants Resolute Capital Partners LTD., LLC, and others moved to compel arbitration. The court heard the motions by videoconference on February 2, 2021, after allowing them to be heard on shortened time.

Arbitration ruling

The court granted the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. It explained that questions about whether the arbitration agreement was enforceable and whether the dispute was covered by the agreement could be decided by the arbitrator because the arbitration rules clearly and unmistakably delegated those questions to the arbitrator. The court also stated that Isozaki had not shown that enforcing the agreement would be unconscionable, meaning unfairly one-sided, or provided evidence that fraud produced the agreement. The court found that the arbitration clause covered all legal claims arising between Isozaki and the defendants.

Preliminary injunction

Because the matter was required to go to arbitration, the court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction. The court additionally stated that Isozaki had not established entitlement to that extraordinary remedy. It cited the general unavailability of injunctive relief to compel payment of money past due under a contract or specific performance of a past-due monetary obligation.

Sealing request and disposition

The court denied the administrative motion to file the arbitration demand under seal because no supporting declaration substantiated the request. The order stated that it terminated all pending motions and that the matter was dismissed. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered the order on February 9, 2021.