On March 21, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed a memorandum upholding a company’s requirement that a consumer’s claims be resolved in arbitration. In this case, the plaintiff, on behalf of a putative class, accused a defendant, which operated an online lending platform, of violating Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, the state’s Loan Interest and Protection Law, and its Consumer Discount Company Act. The defendant moved to compel arbitration, asserting that the plaintiff agreed to the company’s terms and conditions, which included an arbitration provision. The plaintiff opposed this motion, arguing the defendant failed to demonstrate a valid arbitration agreement.

Because the only question before the court was if there was a valid arbitration agreement, and the record showed that there was no genuine dispute as to material fact, the court reviewed the case under the summary judgment standard. In lieu of considering actual knowledge by the plaintiff, the court examined whether the plaintiff had inquiry notice of the terms and whether he assented to them. Conducting a detailed, multi-page review of the online account-opening process, the court found that the terms were reasonably conspicuous and that the plaintiff unambiguously manifested assent by checking a box (agreeing to the terms) during account creation. Thus, the court concluded that the arbitration agreement was valid and enforceable, granting the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration.