Skip to main contentByars v. Bio Clarity
The tentative ruling would reject enforcement of a browsewrap arbitration clause. It examines whether the website gave sufficient notice and obtained assent.
Case record
- Los Angeles Superior Court
- Arbitration and website terms
- 24STCV01349
- Tentative: Motion to compel arbitration denied
- 5 February 2025
- 16 October 2026
What this record establishes
The source is a court’s tentative text mirrored by rulings.law. This record does not establish whether the court adopted or changed it at the hearing, and does not establish the current docket status. A tentative pleading decision evaluates allegations; it is not a finding that tracking occurred or that a party broke the law. This trial-court text is not binding appellate precedent.
Checks for your own systems
Inth’s technical interpretation: use this case to choose what evidence to collect in your own implementation. These checks are not instructions issued by the court or regulator.
- Keep the exact notice, screen sequence and version the user saw.
- Match each claimed consent to the particular collection, purpose and recipient.
- Check how notice and assent work on mobile, during sign-up and in embedded flows.
Sources and limits
Source review: 16 October 2026. This record covers the cited source and procedural stage. It does not audit the organisation’s present implementation or establish every later legal development.