Court Denies J.P. Morgan’s Arbitration Request in Discrimination Case

On March 4, 2026, Judge Orelia E. Merchant denied JP Morgan’s Motion to Compel Arbitration in Faruque v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., et. al.[1]

Ms. Faruque, a Vice President at the company, faced discrimination as an Indian woman, including being excluded from meetings, denied promotions, and receiving lower bonuses than her white male peers. Her male supervisor even insisted she call him “Boss,” a demand not made of male colleagues.

J.P. Morgan argued that Ms. Faruque signed an arbitration agreement that barred her claims from being litigated in court. However, Ms. Faruque contended her claims were exempt under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2022 (EFAA), which excludes “sexual harassment disputes” from arbitration.

The court disagreed with J.P. Morgan’s stance that the case involved “sex discrimination” not covered by the EFAA. It found that under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), a plaintiff only needs to plead that she was “treated less well” due to her gender. Ms. Faruque’s allegations met this standard as she pled that she was subjected to humiliating and demeaning conduct because she is a woman, thus falling under the EFAA’s protections and exempting her from arbitration.

This ruling is a win for employees, reinforcing the NYCHRL’s protective “less well” standard and affirming that the EFAA exempts sufficiently pled sex discrimination claims from arbitration, allowing them to proceed in court.

[1] The undersigned counsel previously served as counsel for Ms. Faruque in a previous role and briefed her Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration.