Hamera v. Best Buy Co, Inc.
1:24-cv-11909
| N.D. Ill. | Jul 2, 2025Background
- Oscar Hamera brought a putative class action against Best Buy in Illinois, alleging he purchased a laptop falsely described as having a 3.3 GHz CPU on BestBuy.com, when it was actually 1.2 GHz.
- Hamera's claims included violations of Illinois consumer protection law, breach of express warranty, common law fraud, and unjust enrichment.
- Best Buy removed the case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act and moved to compel arbitration, arguing Hamera agreed to arbitrate by completing the online checkout process.
- The core procedural dispute centered on whether Best Buy's online checkout constituted an enforceable arbitration agreement, specifically whether the website provided "reasonably conspicuous notice" and manifested Hamera's assent to arbitrate disputes.
- Limited discovery was granted regarding the authenticity and content of the Best Buy checkout screen presented during the transaction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authentication of Checkout Screenshot | Screenshot not admissible; Olson lacked personal knowledge of creation | Olson had requisite personal knowledge; screenshot reflects purchase page | Screenshot authenticated; Olson's testimony sufficient |
| Conspicuousness of Arbitration Terms | Page was cluttered, notice small & not bolded, easily missed | Notice/hyperlink was in blue, directly above “Place Your Order,” clear to user | Notice was reasonably conspicuous under Domer |
| User's Manifestation of Assent | Hamera did not see or read terms, so no assent | Reasonable user standard applies; clicking “Place Your Order” was assent | Reasonable user would be bound by terms |
| Stay Pending Arbitration | Not specifically argued | Appropriate to stay case pending arbitration | Stay granted pending arbitration |
Key Cases Cited
- AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (FAA favors enforceability of arbitration agreements)
- Sgouros v. TransUnion Corp., 817 F.3d 1029 (clickwrap and browsewrap distinctions; notice standard for online contracts)
- Domer v. Menard, Inc., 116 F.4th 686 (Seventh Circuit standard for online assent to arbitration agreements)
- Scheurer v. Fromm Fam. Foods LLC, 863 F.3d 748 (arbitrability as a legal question when facts undisputed)
- Tinder v. Pinkerton Sec., 305 F.3d 728 (burden-shifting framework for compelling arbitration)