James Greiner v. Tesla, Inc.

This question encapsulates what the Plaintiff presented to the lower Courts: 1) When a woman signs a Prenuptial Agreement for a set amount, she cannot argue in divorce court that the Law says “she has the right” to half. Therefore, is it is a Breach of Contract for a Defendant to have a JAMS Arbitration case dismissed by saying the Law says that there is not a “private right of action”’ when the Arbitration Agreement’ itself overrules the Law _ by claiming/promising that “[n arbitration, each side in the dispute presents tts case to a neutral third party called an arbitrator, rather than to a judge or jury.” ...to maintain... “all rights and remedies that we would be entitled to pursue in a court of law.”..making arbitration... “the exclusive method for...resoluing any and all disputes and claims”, which in effect creates a “private right of action”. It 1s the Plaintiffs opinion that this Question obliviously “contains sufficient factual matter” that should easily be “accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that 1s plausible on its face” (Ashcroft v. Iqbal) to satisfy FRCP 12(b)(6). But the District Court Judge disagreed and basically said, the Parties went to Arbitration, and the Plaintiff is just dissatisfied with the Ruling (the Appeals Court simply quoted a 1 Supposedly, the Plaintiff should have filed with the Immigrant and Employee Rights Section “JER” instead of JAMS. (But no hmiting-factors clause is in the contract,)