Plaintiff Objects to R&R Compelling Arbitration in AT&T Breach of Contract Case

A magistrate judge’s June report and recommendation (R&R) doesn't demonstrate a substantial relationship between plaintiff’s claims and an AT&T Wireless customer service agreement containing the arbitration agreement, said plaintiff Al Weiss in a Friday objection (docket 6:23-cv-00120) to the R&R in U.S. District Court for Middle Florida in Orlando. Weiss filed his complaint in January, asserting arbitrability of dispute, unenforceability of the AT&T consumer agreement as "unconscionable and contrary to public policy,” a violation of the Communications Act for unauthorized disclosure of customer proprietary network information, negligence, negligent training and supervision and breach of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. Weiss claims he suffered damages due to AT&T’s “systemic failure to implement and maintain adequate security measures in violation of AT&T’s statutory obligations and duties under federal law,” allowing a third party to “steal hundreds of thousands of dollars” from him. AT&T filed a motion in March seeking to compel arbitration of Weiss’ claims (see 2303220048). Weiss filed an opposition in April, and in June the magistrate judge entered the R&R, recommending the motion be granted. In his objection, Weiss said the R&R considers only the “related to” language in the arbitration provision, not that a substantial relationship exists between the claims and the arbitration agreement. Weiss objects to the R&R because it recommends compelling arbitration without finding a substantial relationship between plaintiff’s claims and the arbitration agreement, contrary to Florida law. “The R&R failed to address, much less find, the existence of a substantial relationship between Plaintiff’s claims and the Customer Service Agreement,” he said.