Ruiz v. Conduent Commercial Sols.

• Decision Date: 11 May 2023
• Docket Number: 1:21-CV-1555 JLT CDB
• Citation: Ruiz v. Conduent Commercial Sols., 1:21-CV-1555 JLT CDB (E.D. Cal. May 11, 2023)
• Parties: LYNN RUIZ, Plaintiff v. CONDUENT COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS, LLC, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendant
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California

1

LYNN RUIZ, Plaintiff v. CONDUENT COMMERCIAL SOLUTIONS, LLC, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendant

No. 1:21-CV-1555 JLT CDB

United States District Court, E.D. California

May 11, 2023

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

(DOC. 6)

This is a putative class action lawsuit brought by Lynn Ruiz against her current employer Conduent Commercial Solutions, LLC.CCS removed this case from the Kern County Superior Court.Ruiz alleges two claims under California law: Labor Code § 28021 and the Unfair Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof Code § 17200).CCS seeks to compel the action to arbitration.For the reasons that follow, Defendants' motion is GRANTED, and the case will be stayed.^[1]

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Ruiz was hired to work for CCS in May 2019 as a customer care representative.CCS is a wholly owned subsidiary of Conduent Business Services, LLC.CBS and CCS provide a full range of outsourcing services and solutions to businesses.Ruiz applied for a position on-line on May 7, 2019.

As part of the on-line application process, Ruiz was required to click a box that stated: “I agree to the terms of this Agreement and to be bound by the [CBS] Dispute Resolution Plan and Rules.”This box appeared under the heading “Dispute Resolution Plan Consent.”A pop-up appeared on Ruiz's screen that contained the Dispute Resolution Plan.Ruiz declared that the DRP appeared to be many pages long and in small print.The DRP was entitled “The Conduent Business Services, LLC Dispute Resolution Plan & Rules.”In relevant part, the DRP provides:

1.Purposes and Construction

The DRP is designed to provide a program for the quick, fair accessible, and inexpensive resolution of all Disputes, as defined hereafter, between the Company and [CBS] Employees and Applicants for employment, including but not limited to those Disputes related to or arising out of a current, former or potential employment relationship with [CBS].The DRP is intended to create an exclusive and mandatory procedural mechanism for the final resolution of all Disputes falling within its terms.It is not intended to either abridge or enlarge substantive rights available under applicable law, provided however that the Parties forgo any right they may have to trial by court(including a jury trial) on matters relating in any way to any Dispute . . . The DRP should be interpreted in accordance with these purposes.

2.Definitions

.....

D.“Company” means Sponsor and every subsidiary (first tier and downstream) of Sponsor, every parent corporation or affiliate, predecessor, and all of their directors, officers, employees . . .

E.“Dispute” means all legal and equitable claims, demands, and controversies, of whatever nature or kind, whether in contract, tort, under statute, regulation, or ordinance, or some other law, between persons (which include Employees, Applicants and the Company) bound by the DRP or by an agreement to resolve Disputes under the DRP, or between a person bound by the DRP and a person or entity otherwise entitled to its benefits, including, but not limited to, any matters with respect to: ...

2.The employment . . . of an Employee, including but not limited to the terms, conditions, or termination of such employment with [CBS];

3.Employee benefits or incidents of employment with the Company (except for claims under an employee benefit or pension plan . . .); ...

7.Any other matter related to or concerning the relationship between the Applicant and the Company and/or the Employee and the Company alleging violation of any federal, state, or other governmental law, statute, regulation, or ordinance, or common law, or contract violation . . . ...

G.“Employee” means any person who is or has been in the employment of [CBS] on or after the Effective Date of the DRP . . . ...

L.“Sponsor” means [CBS].

M. “Conduent Business Services” means [CBS], its subsidiaries, and/or their predecessors. ...

4.Resolution of Disputes

...

B.All Disputes not otherwise resolved by the Parties shall be finally and conclusively resolved through arbitration under this DRP, instead of through trial before a court(including a jury trial).The Parties forego any right they may have to a bench trial or a jury trial on a Dispute.

C. (i) To the extent allowed under the law, each Dispute not otherwise resolved by the Parties shall be arbitrated on an individual basis.Except for Disputes asserted by named plaintiffs or putative plaintiffs in a class, collective, consolidated or representative action pending in court before the Effective Date, neither an Employee nor the Company may initiate or participate in a Dispute on a class, collective, or consolidated basis, or in a representative capacity on behalf of other persons or entities that are claimed to be similarly situated.An applicant may not participate in a class, collective, consolidated or representative Dispute that has been filed against the Company before the Applicant's first day of employment.The arbitrator shall have no authority to arbitrate a Dispute as a consolidated, class, collective or representative action. ...

6.Amendment

The DRP may be amended by Sponsor at any time by giving at least thirty (30) days' notice to current Employees, provided however that no amendment shall apply to a Dispute that was made known to the Company prior to the time the amendment becomes effective.The version of the DRP that was in effect with respect to a particular Applicant or Employee on the date of the Employee's claim was made known to the Company shall apply to that Applicant or Employee's dispute.

7.Termination

The DRP may be terminated by Sponsor at any time by giving at least thirty (30) days' notice of termination to current Employees.However, termination shall not apply to a Dispute that accrued or became known to the Company prior to the effective date of termination.

8.Applicable Law Except to the extent, if any, that federal law requires the application of state law, [the Federal Arbitration Act] and federal law, including federal procedural law . . . shall apply to the DRP, and any proceedings under the DRP . . . In any case in which the arbitrator must make a decision as to applicable law, the arbitrator's authority to decide the applicable law should be guided and determined by the law that would be applied by a U.S. District Court sitting at the place of the arbitration hearing . . . ...

10.Exclusive Remedy

Unless otherwise required by law, proceedings under the DRP shall be the exclusive method by which Disputes are resolved.Arbitration under the DRP shall be final and binding, subject only to review as provided for in the [Federal Arbitration Act].”...

11.Severability

The terms of the DRP are severable . . . Where possible, consistent with the purposes of the DRP, any otherwise invalid provision or term of the DRP may be reformed and, as reformed, enforced.

Doc. 6-2(“Odle Dec.”) at Ex. 1.Additionally, under the “Conduent Business Services Dispute Resolution Rules”section of the DRP, the DRP required that arbitration be performed by either AAA or JAMS.Seeid.This section further provided that “[t]o the extent consistent with the DRP, the arbitrator is expected to apply the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to arbitration proceedings governed by the DRP.”Id.At no point does the DRP identify CCS by name.

The application required applicants to agree to the terms of the DRP in order to be considered for employment.Ruiz did not have the option of opting out of the DRP.Ruiz believed that by clicking the box, the DRP would only apply to her application, not to her actual employment, and that the DRP would only apply if CBS was her employer.Ruiz clicked the box to accept the DRP.

Ruiz was offered a position by CCS the same day she submitted her application.The offer letter in part stated that “Conduent may change any term or condition of your employment at will; with or without cause or notice.”

Ruiz was also provided additional paperwork as part of her employment, which was to be completed no later than June 2 2019.The first document, an “Offer Acknowledgment Form,” identified CCS as her employer.This form also stated that the “Company may change any term or condition of your employment at will; with or without cause or notice.”Ruiz also received an “Acknowledgment of Dispute Resolution”(“ADRP”).The ADRP's provisions mirrored the DRP, Cf.OdleDec. Ex. 1withOdleDec. Ex. 4, and expressly incorporated the entirety of the DRP.SeeOdle Dec. Ex. 4at p.8.In part, the ADRP: (1) requires submission of all disputes (as defined by the DRP) relating to, concerning, or arising out of Ruiz's employment with “Conduent,”(2) waived the right to a bench or jury trial, (3) waived the right to initiate or participate in arbitration of a dispute on a class, collective, consolidated, or representative basis, (4) gave “Conduent” the right to unilaterally modify or terminate the ADRP or the DRP by providing 30 days' notice provided that no modification would apply to a dispute that was made known to “Conduent” prior to modification and no termination would apply to a claim that accrued prior to termination of the ADRP or the DRP; (5) explained that references to “Conduent” included CBS and all of its subsidiaries; (6) contained a severability provision; (7) stated that acceptance of the ADRP was a condition of employment; and (8) stated that Ruiz's failure to sign the ADRP, or any attempt to reject the ADRP or the DRP, would not preclude enforcement of the DRP.SeeOdleDec. Ex. 4.Ruiz electronically signed the ADRP on May 7, 2019 and believed that it was an agreement between herself and only CBS.Ruiz did not believe that the ADRP would involve any other company because she believed that...