United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana
RULING AND ORDER
the Court is Regions Bank's Motion to Compel
Arbitration and to Stay Plaintiffs Claims Against Regions
Bank Pending Arbitration (Doc. 15). Also before the
Court is Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel TransUnion
and Experian to Arbitration (Doc.
24). Oral argument is not
required. For the reasons stated below, Regions Bank's
("Regions") motion is GRANTED and
Plaintiffs motion is DENIED.
Patel "Plaintiff' alleges that in 2016, he obtained
a Regions Bank Credit Card ("Regions Card"). (Doc.
1 at ¶ 11). Plaintiff asserts that he used the card
sparingly, and always paid the full balance in a timely
manner. (Id. at ¶¶ 13-14). Plaintiff
alleges that on or about December 23, 2017, he received
alerts from another of his credit card companies, Ally
Cashback Visa Platinum ("Ally"), notifying him that
his card had been used at a Macy's Department Store in
Lennox Square, in Atlanta, Georgia. (Id. at
¶¶ 15, 16). Plaintiff avers that he notified Ally
that the charge was fraudulent, and Ally refunded the charge.
(Id. at ¶¶ 17-18). Plaintiff claims that
he checked his Regions Card account, and found ten fraudulent
pending charges, totaling $18, 230.46. (Id. at
¶¶ 19-22). Plaintiff alerted Regions of the
allegedly fraudulent activity on December 24, 2017.
(Id. at ¶ 21). Plaintiff alleges that Regions
approved three of the ten pending charges: a charge at
Macy's for $3, 023.29, a charge at Krogers grocery store
for $150.00 and a charge at SAKS department store for $15,
057.17. (Id. at ¶ 22). Plaintiff asserts that
Regions never sent him a fraud alert. (Id. at 1|
efforts to show that his card was charged fraudulently,
Plaintiff avers that he began receiving automated phone calls
from Regions requesting payment for the outstanding balance
on his account. (Id. at ¶ 30). Plaintiff also
claims that Regions began reporting his account as delinquent
to Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. (Id. at ¶
32). Plaintiff claims that Regions continued to report the
unpaid balance, continued to robocall him, and continued to
assess late fees and interest on the unpaid balance, despite
his claims that the charges were fraudulent. (Id. at
claims that he attempted to rent an apartment in May 2018,
but was denied due to a negative entry on his credit report.
(Id. at ¶ 39). Plaintiff alleges that on June
22, 2018, he mailed letters to Equifax, Experian, and Trans
Union explaining the unauthorized charges, and disputing the
Regions tradeline. (Id. at ¶ 42). Plaintiff
avers that upon reporting his dispute with Regions to the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he received copies of
the receipts from the allegedly unauthorized transactions,
none of which contained Plaintiffs signature, and none of
which were similar to each other.
asserts that on July 18, 2018, Regions' agent Sam Lewis
("Lewis") called Plaintiff and notified him that
the investigation resulted in a finding that Plaintiff owed
the disputed charges. (Id. at ¶ 59). Plaintiff
now brings charges against Regions, TransUnion, and
Experian pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1666 et
seq., 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq., and 47
U.S.C. § 227.
does not necessarily dispute any of the facts alleged by
Plaintiff, and only argues that such allegations are subject
to a binding arbitration clause. (Doc. 15- 1 at p. 1).
Specifically, Regions claims that Plaintiff signed a Visa
Consumer Credit Card Application (the
"Application") on November 22, 2016, which provides
that the account would be governed by the Credit Card
Agreement, to be sent with the Regions Card. (Id.).
Regions further alleges that the Credit Card Agreement
provides that "all disputes regarding an Account or the
Agreement are subject to binding arbitration, which impacts
[Plaintiffs] rights to participate in a class action or
similar judicial proceeding." (Id. at p.p.
1-2). The arbitration provision of the Credit Card Agreement
ARBITRATION AND WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL. Except
as expressly provided herein, you and we agree that
either party may elect to resolve by BINDING ARBITRATION any
controversy, claim, counterclaim, dispute or disagreement
between you and us, whether asserted or brought in a direct,
derivative, assignee, survivor, successor, beneficiary
or personal capacity and whether arising
before or after the effective date of this Agreement (any
"Claim") [ . . . ] If either party elects to
arbitrate, the Claim shall be settled by BINDING ARBITRATION
under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA").
This agreement to arbitrate shall include any Claim involving
our current and former officers, directors, employees,
agents, representatives, contractors, subcontractors, parent,
subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, assigns, any third
party that assigned any agreements to us and any of the
respective current and former employees, officers, agents or
directors of such affiliates or third parties, and any such
Claim against any of those parties may be joined or
consolidated with any related Claim against us in a single
asserts that all of Plaintiffs claims fall under the scope of
the arbitration agreement.
Court has the authority to compel arbitration pursuant to 9
U.S.C. § 4, which provides in relevant part:
A party aggrieved by the alleged failure, neglect, or refusal
of another to arbitrate under a written agreement for
arbitration may petition any United States district court
which, save for such agreement, would have jurisdiction under
title 28, in a civil action or in admiralty of the subject
matter of a suit arising out of the controversy between the
parties, for an order directing that such arbitration proceed
in the manner provided for in such agreement.
is a matter of contract. Rent-A-Ctr., W., Inc. v.
Jackson,561 U.S. 63, 69, (2010). Agreements to
arbitrate fall within the scope and coverage of the Federal
Arbitration Act (the "Act"), and must be enforced
in both state and federal courts. KPMG LLP v.
Cocchi,565 U.S. 18, 19 (2011). If a dispute presents
multiple claims, some which fall under the scope of the
arbitration, and some ...