Johnson v. Mitek Systems Inc,

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s request to refer to arbitration plaintiff’s class action lawsuit alleging violations of section 15 of Illinois Biometric Privacy Act. Record showed that: (1) defendant provided to third-party identity-verification services involving plaintiff and others, under circumstances where plaintiff and others sought to lease vehicles from third-party; and (2) defendant sought to invoke arbitration clause found in contract between plaintiff and third-party. While arbitration clause in contract between plaintiff and third-party covered disputes between plaintiff, third-party, and “beneficiaries of services or goods provided” under said contract, Dist. Ct. could properly find that suppliers of services to third-party, such as defendant, were not covered under arbitration clause. Ct. of Appeals, in affirming Dist. Ct., rejected defendant’s claim that instant dispute with plaintiff was covered under arbitration clause, because it was “beneficiary of services provided’ under contract between plaintiff and third-party, where Ct. found that “services” at issue in contract between plaintiff and third-party dealt with services to third-party’s customers and not to services supplied to third-party. Ct. also noted that it was difficult to find that plaintiff was required to arbitrate instant dispute, where defendant did not have any contract with plaintiff.