T-Mobile Presses Its Case for Arbitration in 5G Shutdown Class Action
Class-action plaintiff Juan Luis Garcia Moreno doesn't contest that he agreed to arbitrate disputes with T-Mobile, said the carrier Friday in a reply (docket 2:22-cv-00843) in U.S. District Court for Western Washington in Seattle in support of its motion to…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
compel arbitration. An arbitrator, not the court, “has the sole responsibility to determine the enforceability and scope of the arbitration agreement,” said T-Mobile. Garcia Moreno “acknowledges that nothing in the arbitration agreement impairs his ability to get complete relief for any individual claim he has against T-Mobile,” it said. Garcia Moreno’s June 15 class action alleges T-Mobile developed, marketed, distributed and advertised the launch of its 5G network without disclosing to its customers, including former Sprint customers, that it intended to shut down older 5G networks without adequately addressing network incompatibilities for numerous devices dependent on them. T-Mobile’s July 2020 shutdown of Sprint’s 5G network left about 75,000 sold 5G phones without the ability to receive a 5G signal, said the complaint. Rather than offer owners of those phones free upgrades, customers would have to switch their phone and phone plan to a new offering from T-Mobile, it alleged, seeking damages under the Washington Consumer Protection Act. T-Mobile responded Aug. 29 with a motion to compel the dispute to arbitration, asserting Garcia Moreno repeatedly agreed he would arbitrate claims against T-Mobile on an individual basis. Garcia Moreno’s opposition to the motion to compel challenged the “substantive conscionability” of the T-Mobile arbitration agreement.