Russell Rope v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, et al.

This case concerns whether a state court may compel arbitration based on disputed electronic terms, generalized platform evidence, and alleged digital assent without resolving preserved objections to formation, authentication, the operative agreement, biometric-access restrictions, public-facing relief, non-signatory actors, and whether post-lockout misconduct falls within the scope of any proven arbitration agreement. The questions presented are:

1. Whether a court may compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act where the party seeking arbitration failed to prove formation through competent, authenticated, account-specific evidence establishing assent to the operative electronic arbitration agreement.

2. Whether due process permits a court to compel arbitration and stay a civil action without findings resolving preserved disputes concerning electronic assent, authentication, the identity of the operative agreement, delegation, public injunctive relief, and disabilityrelated objections.

3. Whether due process and the Federal Arbitration Act require judicial resolution, before arbitration may be compelled, of preserved threshold objections that mandatory biometric verification and the refusal of reasonable alternative verification create an access barrier to custodial digital assets, and that the asserted arbitration agreement would waive or preclude public injunctive relief, including public-facing relief directed at that same biometric-access barrier. Petition for a Writ of Certiorari - Page 2 of 34