In its recent judgment, the United States Supreme Court upheld an AT&T Mobility LLC arbitration clause which will require the customers to bring their conflicts at an individual level rather than as a member of a union.

The whole issue was followed by a complaint filed in a California federal district court by a couple which alleged that AT&T engaged in false advertising when it assessed a sales tax on cell phones that the couple received for free as part of the service agreement.

Another allegation by the couple stated that the arbitration clause that didn’t allow the combination of their complaint with a class action was unconscionable under California state law.

After losing their case in the federal district court and the United States Court of Appeal-Ninth Circuit, AT&T appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court but the Court found no intent to preserve state laws that stood as an obstacle to the promotion of arbitration in the Federal Arbitration Act.

Alan Kaplinsky, a Philadelphia lawyer for the American Bankers Assn, stated, “I think this decision will help consumers, not hurt them. The only people who do well in the class-action suits are the lawyers. The attorneys get millions in fees, and the consumers get a worthless coupon. For them, it's better to go through arbitration”.