context: Also, just as in Mastrobuono, the parties here entered into an agreement in which, without the choice-of-law provision, the FAA rule would apply. Finally, also as in Mastrobuono, the clause does not unequivocally suggest an intent to displace the default federal standard.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 257 F.3d 294, 294-95
citation_a.parenthetical: drawing the same conclusion about the choice-of-law clause in that case based on Mastrobuono's language
citation_a.sentence: See id. at 62, 115 S.Ct. 1212 (“At most, the choice-of-law provision introduces an ambiguity into an arbitration agreement that would otherwise allow punitive damages awards.”); see also Roadway Package Sys., 257 F.3d at 294-95 (drawing the same conclusion about the choice-of-law clause in that case based on Mastrobuono’s language).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.parenthetical: "At most, the choice-of-law provision introduces an ambiguity into an arbitration agreement that would otherwise allow punitive damages awards."
citation_b.sentence: See id. at 62, 115 S.Ct. 1212 (“At most, the choice-of-law provision introduces an ambiguity into an arbitration agreement that would otherwise allow punitive damages awards.”); see also Roadway Package Sys., 257 F.3d at 294-95 (drawing the same conclusion about the choice-of-law clause in that case based on Mastrobuono’s language).