Consumers filed a putative class action alleging statutory and
common law consumer protection and false advertising claims under
California and Alabama law, specifically alleging that AT&T
falsely advertised their mobile service plans as
"unlimited" when in fact it intentionally slowed data at
certain usage levels. AT&T moved to compel arbitration pursuant
the arbitration agreements included in their wireless data service
plans and in light of the Supreme Court's 2011 ruling in
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, which held that the Federal
Arbitration Act preempts state law deeming AT&T's
arbitration provision to be unconscionable.
Plaintiffs opposed the motion on First Amendment grounds,
arguing that an order forcing arbitration would violate the
Petition Clause because they "did not knowingly and
voluntarily give up their right to have a court adjudicate their
claims" and could not "bring their claims in small claims
court." The district court granted AT&T's motion
