Varner v. Sunrun Installation Services, Inc., 18-cv-00328-JAO-KJM. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Hawaii
Number: infdco20190307a53
Visitors: 6
Filed: Mar. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT JILL A. OTAKE , District Judge . ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS COMPLAINT Plaintiff John Varner brought a single employment discrimination claim against Defendant Sunrun Installation Services, Inc. He alleges under the Americans with Disabilities Act that Sunrun discriminated against him on account of his disability. Doc. No. 1. Sunrun filed a motion to compel arbitration and dismiss
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT JILL A. OTAKE , District Judge . ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS COMPLAINT Plaintiff John Varner brought a single employment discrimination claim against Defendant Sunrun Installation Services, Inc. He alleges under the Americans with Disabilities Act that Sunrun discriminated against him on account of his disability. Doc. No. 1. Sunrun filed a motion to compel arbitration and dismiss t..
More
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT
JILL A. OTAKE, District Judge.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND DISMISS COMPLAINT
Plaintiff John Varner brought a single employment discrimination claim against Defendant Sunrun Installation Services, Inc. He alleges under the Americans with Disabilities Act that Sunrun discriminated against him on account of his disability. Doc. No. 1. Sunrun filed a motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint based on the parties' arbitration agreement that all employment-related claims, including those under the Americans with Disabilities Act, must be resolved by binding arbitration. Doc. No. 9-1. Varner filed a statement of no opposition to the motion.1 Doc. No. 17; see LR 7.4 ("A party not opposing a motion shall instead file a statement of no opposition or no position[.]").
The Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.2(d), and therefore VACATES the hearing on this matter currently set for March 15, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. Because Varner does not oppose Sunrun's motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint, the Court GRANTS Sunrun's motion to compel arbitration and DISMISSES the complaint without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Plaintiff erroneously relied on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 7(b) and 12(c) in his statement of no opposition. Those rules address forms of motions and motions for judgment on the pleadings. The Court construes Plaintiff's statement of no opposition as made pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.4.
Source: Leagle
