Case Explained: RICKES V. THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC, INC., ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-05 Docket: 3:25-cv-00690-GPC-JLB The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc.’s motion to compel arbitration in an employment dispute involving age discrimination claims under California law. The court held that the employer failed to meet its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff assented to the Mutual Dispute Resolution Agreement (MDRA). Applying ordinary principles of California contract formation, the court determined that mutual assent requires both notice and an objective manifestation of agreement, noting that silence alone does not constitute assent. Because electronic records showed the plaintiff never viewed the emails containing the agreement or interacted with the hyperlink, and because continuing employment without a signed acknowledgment or affirmative conduct such as clicking a button was insufficient to establish acceptance under California law, no binding arbitration agreement existed. Consequently, the denial of the motion to compel stands, and the case proceeds in district court without an order requiring the parties to arbitrate their dispute. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.