SiriusXM Moves to Compel First of 3 Fraud Class Actions to Arbitration

Plaintiffs Ayana Stevenson, David Ambrose and Lisa Ramirez entered into subscriber agreements with SiriusXM in which they agreed to resolve any disputes with the company “informally” or through binding arbitration, said SiriusXM’s motion Monday (docket 3:23-cv-02367) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Francisco to compel their claims to arbitration. Their class action, the first of three filed against the company over several weeks, alleges SiriusXM falsely advertises its music plans at lower prices than it actually charges (see 2305160038). Despite their “straightforward agreement” to resolve their disputes through arbitration, plaintiffs Stevenson, Ambrose and Ramirez sued SiriusXM, “complaining about the company’s automatic subscription renewal practices and the alleged failure to sufficiently disclose the existence and nature” of SiriusXM’s U.S. music royalty fee, said the motion to compel. The plaintiffs “should be held to their promises,” it said. There can be no doubt the plaintiffs are bound by their customer agreements, said the motion to compel. All of them “expressly clicked buttons making clear that they agreed to its terms,” it said. All also continued using SiriusXM’s service “while being repeatedly told that, by doing so, they agreed to be bound” by their customer agreements, it said. “There can also be no doubt that their claims here fall within the scope of their promise to arbitrate,” it said. Though the plaintiffs “apparently intend to try to dodge arbitration by seeking public injunctive relief, that attempt must fail,” said the motion to compel. The arbitration agreement “commits gateway questions about enforceability to the arbitrator,” it said. Nothing in the arbitration agreement “precludes the arbitrator from awarding public injunctive relief if appropriate and if plaintiffs have standing to seek it,” it said.