SAUBERMAN v. AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, L.L.C., 2:17-cv-00756

Plaintiff Joshua Sauberman filed a putative class action under the TCPA alleging Avis sent unwanted text messages tied to a car reservation.
Plaintiff alleges the reservation was made via Avis’s website and that customers are presented a checkbox for consent to texts; Avis nonetheless sent texts without consent.
Avis moved to compel arbitration, asserting Sauberman was an Avis Preferred ("Wizard") member and agreed to Preferred Rental Transaction Terms containing an arbitration clause and class waiver.
Sauberman opposes, denying he entered his Wizard/Preferred member number when making the reservation and noting the Preferred terms apply only to rentals placed using Avis Preferred.
Avis requested limited discovery to establish whether Sauberman used his Wizard number for the contested reservation.
The Court denied the motion to compel arbitration without prejudice and ordered limited discovery on whether an arbitration agreement applies; if necessary, Avis may renew the motion, which will be judged under Rule 56.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a valid arbitration agreement governs this dispute	Sauberman says he did not use his Avis Preferred/Wizard number for the reservation, so the Preferred terms (including arbitration) do not apply	Avis says Sauberman was an Avis Preferred member and used his Wizard number for the rental, so the Preferred arbitration clause governs	Motion to compel denied without prejudice; limited discovery ordered on whether the Preferred agreement applies; renewed motion evaluated under Rule 56

Guidotti v. Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, L.L.C., 716 F.3d 764 (3d Cir. 2013) (explains when to permit limited discovery on existence of an arbitration agreement and applicable standard for later resolution)
Kirleis v. Dickie, McCarney & Chilcote, P.C., 560 F.3d 156 (3d Cir. 2009) (two-step test: existence of valid arbitration agreement and scope of dispute)