Whether California courts can avoid consideration of Lamps Plus v. Varela and instead adhere to a contrary state appellate precedent

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Notwithstanding the express holding of this Court in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 139 S. Ct. 1407, 1417 (2019) (“Lamps Plus”) that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempts the state common law doctrine of contra proferentem with regard to interpreting whether an arbitration agreement provides for arbitration of claims, can California courts avoid consideration of Lamps Plus and instead adhere to a contrary state appellate precedent, Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. v. Superior Court, 234 Cal. App. 4th 1109 (2015)?