Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Luxottica U.S. Holdings Corp., et al. v. Janet Duke
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 24-3207 · judgment February 5, 2026
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a petition filed soon after the judgment below, a Second Circuit decision below, and a business petitioner.
Question presented
The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) protects the right to “traditional individualized arbitration.” Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 584 U.S. 497, 509 (2018). In this case, the court of appeals held that agreements for individualized arbitration are unenforceable for claims under Section 502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2). It invalidated the parties’ arbitration agreement “on public policy grounds,” invoking an atextual, judgemade exception to the FAA, which this Court has never applied to invalidate an arbitration agreement. App., infra, 20a (citation omitted). The question presented is: Whether the FAA requires courts to enforce agreements for individualized arbitration of claims under ERISA Section 502(a)(2), 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Michael Edward Kenneally Jr.
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
For respondent
Rachana Ambarish Pathak
Stris & Maher LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- May 18 2026Petition DENIED.
- Apr 22 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/14/2026.
- Apr 17 2026Waiver of right of respondent Janet Duke to respond filed.
- Mar 23 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 27, 2026)