Case Explained: MUNDLE, ET AL. V. DOXO, INC., ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-08

Docket: 2:24-cv-00893-TSZ

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order denying the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in a putative class action contract dispute. The court held that the defendants waived their right to arbitrate by engaging in litigation conduct inconsistent with that right. Applying the “totality of the circumstances” standard, the panel determined that the defendants made an intentional decision to seek judicial judgment on the merits rather than exercising their arbitration rights. This conclusion was based on the defendants’ repeated motions to dismiss the entire complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), their participation in discovery and status conferences for ten months without raising arbitration, and their belated assertion of the right to arbitrate only after their motion to dismiss failed. The court rejected the defendants’ arguments that a reservation of rights in their answer or minimal discovery activity prevented a finding of waiver, noting that express disclaimers are insufficient to defeat a claim of waiver when the party has actively litigated the merits for a prolonged period. Consequently, the case remains in federal district court for further proceedings on the merits.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.