No. 25-1121

Luxottica U.S. Holdings Corp., et al. v. Janet Duke

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2026-03-26
Status: Pending
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: arbitration-agreements employee-benefits ERISA Federal-Arbitration-Act public-policy-exception statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference: N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)

The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) protects the right to "traditional individualized arbitration." Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 584 U.S. 497, 509 (2018). In this case, the court of appeals held that agreements for individualized arbitration are unenforceable for claims under Section 502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2). It invalidated the parties' arbitration agreement "on public policy grounds," invoking an atextual, judge-made exception to the FAA, which this Court has never applied to invalidate an arbitration agreement. App., infra, 20a (citation omitted).

The question presented is:

Whether the FAA requires courts to enforce agreements for individualized arbitration of claims under ERISA Section 502(a)(2), 29 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2).

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to enforce agreements for individualized arbitration of claims under ERISA Section 502(a)(2)

Docket Entries

2026-03-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 27, 2026)

Attorneys

Luxottica U.S. Holdings Corp., et al.
Michael Edward Kenneally Jr.Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Petitioner