The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari to address whether an arbitration clause that provides for application of state arbitration law was preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.  DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, No. 14-462 (cert. granted March 23, 2015).  The case involved the denial of a motion to compel arbitration, which was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal.  Imburgia v. DIRECTV, Inc., 225 Cal. App. 4th 338 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2014).  The parties’ arbitration agreement stated that if “the law of your state would find this agreement to dispense with class arbitration procedures unenforceable, then this entire [arbitration clause] is unenforceable.”  The California Court of Appeal concluded that, under California law, the class action waiver was unenforceable, rendering the entire arbitration agreement unenforceable even though federal law would lead to a different result.  The question to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court is: “Did the California Court of Appeal err by holding, in direct conflict with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, that a reference to state law in an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act requires the application of state law preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act?”