Moreira v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

What the order addressed

The court stated that the parties were permitted, but not required, to submit supplemental letters of no more than three pages by 5:00 p.m. on August 30, 2023.

The defendant’s proposed letter was to address the Second Circuit’s decision in Gingras v. Think Finance, Inc., 922 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 2019), and that decision’s impact on the court’s ability to consider whether the underlying arbitration agreement was unconscionable, meaning unfairly one-sided or oppressive. The defendant was also directed to identify cases addressing whether a claim was “related to” a contract based on how the plaintiff discovered the claim or because the complaint relied on documents obtained under the contract.

The plaintiff could address those same topics. The plaintiff’s letter was also to identify cases in which a court found an arbitration agreement unconscionable even though it covered only claims arising out of or relating to the container contract.

Settlement-related directives

The plaintiff was ordered to consider making a good-faith settlement demand by 11:00 a.m. on August 30, 2023. If a demand was made, the defendant was ordered to consider responding with a good-faith settlement offer by 5:00 p.m. that day. The parties were ordered to meet and discuss settlement on August 31, 2023, at 1:00 p.m., and to update the court about settlement discussions by 3:00 p.m. that day without disclosing the amounts of any demand or offer.

Disposition

This order did not decide whether the arbitration agreement was enforceable or unconscionable, and it did not resolve whether the claims were related to the contract. It set briefing opportunities and settlement-related deadlines.