# MassArbitration > MassArbitration is a news and reference desk for lawyers tracking mass arbitration: provider rule changes, unconscionability rulings, batching and bellwether design, fee mechanics, and the mass tort vocabulary that surrounds it. MassArbitration is a news and reference desk for lawyers. Everything on the site is analysis and summary, not legal advice. Case citations are given for orientation and should be verified in a primary source. Fee figures reflect published provider schedules as reported in cited sources. ## Key pages - [Newsroom](https://massarbitration.co/news): source-cited briefings on rulings, provider rule changes, and scholarship - [Case tracker](https://massarbitration.co/cases): the decisions practitioners cite, with holding and why it matters - [Provider rules](https://massarbitration.co/rules): AAA vs JAMS thresholds, gatekeepers, and fee schedules side by side - [Glossary](https://massarbitration.co/glossary): 117 terms across mass arbitration, arbitration procedure, FAA doctrine, class actions, MDL/mass tort, and fees & funding - [FAQ](https://massarbitration.co/faq): answer-first Q&A - [About](https://massarbitration.co/about): who it is for, sourcing, corrections ## FAQ - **What is mass arbitration?** Mass arbitration is the coordinated filing of hundreds or thousands of individual arbitration demands against one company at the same time, by claimants represented by the same or coordinated counsel. Each demand is formally individual, so it satisfies a class action waiver — but per-claim administrative fees fall on the respondent, creating settlement pressure before any arbitrator reads a claim. - **How many claims trigger the AAA's mass arbitration rules?** Twenty-five or more similar demands in consumer and employment matters, filed by or against the same party with the same or coordinated counsel. A higher threshold of one hundred applies outside those contexts. The AAA applies the rules at its own discretion — no contractual adoption is required. - **How many claims trigger the JAMS mass arbitration procedures?** Seventy-five claimants represented by the same or coordinated counsel, regardless of dispute type. Unlike the AAA regime, the JAMS Mass Arbitration Procedures apply only where the parties expressly adopted them in the arbitration agreement. - **How much does a mass arbitration cost the company?** Under the AAA's post-January 2024 schedule, reported exposure for 10,000 consumer demands is roughly $6 million, down from over $15 million under the prior per-case schedule. The flat $11,250 initiation fee and elimination of case management fees moved cost from the filing stage to the merits stage rather than removing it. - **Can a company refuse to pay mass arbitration fees?** Sometimes, and the consequences depend on jurisdiction. In Wallrich v. Samsung (7th Cir. 2024) a federal court could not order a respondent to pay AAA fees where the incorporated rules commit fee disputes to the provider. In California, failure to pay within 30 days is a material breach that waives arbitration and triggers mandatory sanctions under CCP §§ 1281.97–1281.98. - **Are batching provisions in arbitration clauses enforceable?** Only if the queue they create is reasonable and claimants are protected while they wait. Courts have struck batching clauses that give the company control over duration, lack an outer time limit, or lack tolling — Achey v. Cellco (N.J. App. Div. 2023) and Rios v. HRB Digital (N.D. Cal. 2025) both computed how long the last claimant would wait and found the answer unconscionable. - **What did Heckman v. Live Nation decide?** The Ninth Circuit held Ticketmaster's mass arbitration protocol — including its delegation clause — procedurally and substantively unconscionable, and held that applying California unconscionability law was not preempted by the FAA. Three confidential bellwether outcomes would have bound every other claimant. The Supreme Court denied certiorari on 6 October 2025. - **What is the difference between a bellwether trial and a bellwether provision?** A bellwether trial in an MDL is tried to verdict to inform settlement valuation and binds only the parties to that case. A contractual bellwether provision in an arbitration clause often purports to bind claimants who never participated in the sample proceedings — which is the feature courts have found unconscionable. - **Why did Amazon drop and then reinstate arbitration?** Amazon removed its consumer arbitration clause in 2021 after roughly 75,000 Alexa privacy demands made the clause more expensive than class litigation. It reinstated binding individual arbitration and a class action waiver effective 14 August 2026, with a 60-day pre-arbitration notice requirement and escalating JAMS batching. - **Is mass arbitration used outside the United States?** Rarely. Major international institutions such as the ICC and LCIA have no mass proceeding frameworks, many jurisdictions — the EU prominently — treat consumer disputes as non-arbitrable, and investor-state filing fees fall on claimants rather than respondents, removing the fee asymmetry the tactic depends on. - **Is this site legal advice?** No. MassArbitration publishes analysis and reference material for legal professionals. Nothing here is legal advice, and reading it creates no attorney-client relationship. Case citations are given for orientation and should be verified in a primary source before reliance. ## Articles - [Amazon Comes Back to Arbitration — and Brings a Funder Disclosure Clause With It](https://massarbitration.co/news/amazon-arbitration-return-funder-disclosure) (2026-08-26): Five years after abandoning consumer arbitration under the weight of 75,000 Alexa demands, Amazon reinstated it on 14 August 2026. The new clause is the most complete defence-side answer to mass arbitration yet drafted: a 60-day condition precedent, escalating JAMS batching, appeal rights on every batch, and a first-of-its-kind obligation to hand over litigation funding agreements. - [The Rulebook Rewrote Itself: Where AAA and JAMS Now Stand on Mass Filings](https://massarbitration.co/news/aaa-jams-mass-arbitration-rulebook) (2026-08-18): Two providers, two philosophies. The AAA applies its mass regime at its own discretion and flattened the initiation fee; JAMS will only run its procedures if you wrote them into the contract. The gap between those choices decides who has leverage on day one. - [Heckman Set the Ceiling on Protocol Design — and the Supreme Court Left It There](https://massarbitration.co/news/heckman-live-nation-bellwether-ceiling) (2026-08-11): The Ninth Circuit struck down a bespoke mass arbitration regime root and branch, including its delegation clause. Certiorari was denied in October 2025. Every protocol drafted since has been written in that decision's shadow. - [Rios v. HRB Digital: The Court Did the Arithmetic, and the Protocol Failed](https://massarbitration.co/news/rios-hrb-digital-batching-math) (2026-07-28): Twenty-five coordinated claims per round. Aggressive resolution targets. A tolling provision the drafter could contest. The Northern District of California found the combination unconscionable — and gave every clause reviewer a checklist. - [Wallrich and the Non-Payment Strategy: What the Seventh Circuit Actually Decided](https://massarbitration.co/news/wallrich-samsung-fee-nonpayment) (2026-07-14): Thirty-five thousand claimants, a $4.1 million invoice, and a respondent that declined to pay. The Seventh Circuit held a district court could not order it to — a ruling whose reach depends entirely on the words a clause uses to incorporate provider rules. - [Achey: The Decision That Made Courts Count the Queue](https://massarbitration.co/news/achey-cellco-batching-queue) (2026-06-23): Twenty-five claimants trigger the protocol; ten claims move at a time; nothing sets an outer limit and nothing tolls the clock. A New Jersey appellate court declined to sever, and struck the agreement in its entirety. - [106 Companies, Rewritten Clauses, and a Preemption Argument Nobody Expected](https://massarbitration.co/news/frankel-empirical-study-clause-redrafting) (2026-06-09): Richard Frankel's empirical study of corporate responses to mass arbitration documents what the redrafting wave actually produced — and argues that the resulting procedural apparatus may have drifted outside what the Federal Arbitration Act protects at all. - [Glover's Taxonomy: Why Mass Arbitration Is Not a Variation on Anything](https://massarbitration.co/news/glover-mass-arbitration-new-model) (2026-05-19): The first systematic account of mass arbitration argued it constitutes a genuinely new model of dispute resolution — and documented defendants abandoning the clauses they had spent two decades securing. - [Why Mass Arbitration Stays Home](https://massarbitration.co/news/international-enforcement-limits) (2026-05-05): The institutional frameworks do not exist, consumer disputes are non-arbitrable across much of Europe, and investor-state filing fees make the model economically impossible. Mass arbitration looks likely to remain an American phenomenon. - [Nothing You Draft After the Demands Arrive Will Help](https://massarbitration.co/news/drafting-for-mass-arbitration-exposure) (2026-04-21): The defence bar has converged on one point: mass arbitration is a drafting problem, and the drafting window closes the moment the first tranche is filed. What a clause reviewed with mass exposure in mind actually contains. - [The $218 Billion Inventory: Mass Arbitration Arrives in Commercial Antitrust](https://massarbitration.co/news/google-advertiser-mass-arbitration) (2026-04-16): Keller Postman began filing advertiser demands against Google in April 2026, built on the 2024 monopolisation rulings and an economist's overcharge model running to $218 billion. The claimants are not consumers with negative-value claims. They are businesses, and Google's own arbitration clause is what routes them there. - [Milberg Opens a Privacy Inventory Against Yahoo Over ConnectID](https://massarbitration.co/news/milberg-yahoo-connectid-campaign) (2026-04-08): The claim is that an email address became a permanent tracking identifier that survived cookie deletion. The procedural point is that the campaign was launched as a mass arbitration from the outset, with claimant recruitment running through a partner intake platform rather than a class definition. - [The Fee Curve, Before and After January 2024](https://massarbitration.co/news/fee-economics-before-after-2024) (2026-04-07): Case management fees, not filing fees, were what made mass arbitration devastating. The AAA eliminated them. Here is what the numbers look like on either side of that change — and where the cost has migrated to. - [Filing the Demands Is Petitioning: New York Dismisses a Retaliatory Suit Against Claimant Firms](https://massarbitration.co/news/scps-ben-travis-anti-slapp) (2026-04-03): Two sweepstakes casino operators sued the firms that had built mass arbitration campaigns against them for malicious prosecution. On 31 March 2026, Justice Phaedra F. Perry-Bond dismissed every claim under New York's anti-SLAPP statute — and made the fee award mandatory. - [Who Pays for the Inventory: Funding, Conflicts, and the Disclosure Gap](https://massarbitration.co/news/third-party-funding-and-the-conflict-problem) (2026-03-17): Litigation funders increasingly finance mass arbitration campaigns. A funder's return depends on aggregate portfolio recovery; counsel owe duties to each individual claimant. No uniform disclosure regime exists to surface the tension. - [The Carve-Out Is the Only Reform That Has Passed](https://massarbitration.co/news/policy-reform-and-the-carve-out-model) (2026-02-24): Broad restrictions on consumer and employment arbitration have gone nowhere. The 2022 sexual assault and harassment statute did pass — and it established the template every serious reform proposal now follows. - [The Premise That Turned Out to Be Contingent](https://massarbitration.co/news/the-economics-of-negative-value-claims) (2026-01-27): Litigation theory held that claims worth less than the cost of bringing them cannot be litigated without a procedural aggregation device. Mass arbitration showed that premise depended on institutional design — and everything since has been an attempt to restore it. ## Cases - [AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (Supreme Court of the United States 2011)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#concepcion): The Federal Arbitration Act preempts state-law rules that stand as an obstacle to enforcing bilateral arbitration agreements, including rules invalidating class-action waivers as unconscionable. - [Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 584 U.S. 497 (Supreme Court of the United States 2018)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#epic-systems): Agreements requiring individualised arbitration proceedings must be enforced as written; the National Labor Relations Act does not displace the FAA. - [Abernathy v. DoorDash, Inc., 438 F. Supp. 3d 1062 (N.D. Cal. 2020)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#abernathy-doordash): The court compelled arbitration of roughly 5,000 individual couriers' claims, rejecting the company's attempt to avoid the fee consequences of the clause it had drafted. - [Achey v. Cellco Partnership, 475 N.J. Super. 446, 293 A.3d 551 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2023)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#achey-cellco): The batching provision was unconscionable on its face: it handed the respondent control over how long batching continued, set no outer time limit, and provided no tolling for claimants stuck in the queue. The arbitration agreement was unenforceable in its entirety. - [Wallrich v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 106 F.4th 609 (7th Cir. 2024)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#wallrich-samsung): Reversed. Because the agreement incorporated the provider's rules — which give the provider discretion over fee disputes — the district court exceeded its authority in ordering the respondent to pay the AAA's fees. - [Heckman v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., 120 F.4th 670 (9th Cir. 2024)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#heckman-live-nation): Both the delegation clause and the agreement as a whole were procedurally and substantively unconscionable. Applying California unconscionability law was not preempted by the FAA. Certiorari was denied on 6 October 2025 (No. 24-1145), leaving the decision intact. - [Rios v. HRB Digital LLC, No. 3:25-cv-03530 (Chen, J.) (N.D. Cal. 2025)](https://massarbitration.co/cases#rios-hrb-digital): Motion to compel arbitration denied. The clause was procedurally unconscionable — a non-negotiable form contract presented in tax season with an opt-out buried in a long agreement and requiring renewed annual action — and substantively unconscionable, because the tolling provision let the respondent contest notice completeness and then invoke limitations. ## Glossary ### Mass Arbitration - [Administrative Closure](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/administrative-closure): A provider's termination of filed cases, typically for non-payment of required fees. - [Affirmation Requirement](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/affirmation-requirement): A provider rule obliging counsel to attest that each claimant's information is accurate. - [Aggregate Settlement (Mass Arbitration)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/aggregate-settlement-arbitration): Global resolution of a mass filing inventory, typically at a fraction of the administrative fee exposure. - [Arbitration Carve-Out](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/arbitration-carve-out): Categories of dispute excluded from the arbitration obligation. - [Batching](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/batching): A contractual mechanism releasing mass demands in fixed tranches rather than all at once. - [Bellwether Provision (Arbitration)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/bellwether-provision): A clause under which a small sample of arbitrations is resolved first, with results shaping or binding the remainder. - [Blow-Up Provision](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/blow-up-provision): A term providing that if part of the arbitration scheme fails, the whole agreement — or the class waiver — falls with it. - [Claim Aggregation](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/claim-aggregation): Assembling many small, individually uneconomic claims into a portfolio with meaningful leverage. - [Claim Suppression](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/claim-suppression): The net effect of procedural requirements that deter, delay, or defeat claims regardless of merit. - [Claimant Solicitation](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/claimant-solicitation): Digital recruitment of claimants at scale through targeted advertising and intake automation. - [Claimant Vetting](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/claimant-vetting): Verification that each claimant is real, identifiable, and actually bound by the arbitration agreement. - [Coordinated Counsel](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/coordinated-counsel): The same firm, or firms acting in concert, representing the claimant population in a mass filing. - [Demand for Arbitration](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/demand-for-arbitration): The filing that commences an arbitration and starts the fee clock. - [Evidentiary Precondition](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/evidentiary-precondition): A clause term requiring documentary proof of a claim before arbitration may be initiated. - [Fee Non-Payment](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/fee-nonpayment): A respondent's refusal to pay provider fees, forcing closure of the filed demands. - [Informal Resolution Period](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/informal-resolution-period): A mandatory waiting window between notice and the right to file. - [Mass Arbitration](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/mass-arbitration): Hundreds or thousands of individually filed, legally identical arbitration demands brought against one respondent at once. - [Mass Arbitration Protocol](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/mass-arbitration-protocol): The bespoke procedural regime a clause imposes once mass filings are triggered. - [Mass Filing Threshold](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/mass-filing-threshold): The number of similar demands that triggers a provider's mass arbitration rules. - [Opt-Out Clause](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/opt-out-clause): A window in which a consumer may reject the arbitration agreement without losing the underlying service. - [Pre-Arbitration Notice](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/pre-arbitration-notice): A contractual requirement to notify the respondent and attempt informal resolution before filing. - [Process Administrator](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/process-administrator): The JAMS equivalent of a Process Arbitrator, charged with preliminary and administrative determinations. - [Process Arbitrator](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/process-arbitrator): An AAA-appointed neutral who resolves administrative disputes before merits arbitrators are appointed. - [Small Claims Carve-Out](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/small-claims-carve-out): A clause term preserving the right to bring qualifying claims in small claims court. - [Staggered Processing](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/staggered-processing): Resolving mass demands in sequence rather than in parallel. - [Tolling Provision](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/tolling-provision): A clause suspending limitations periods while claimants wait in a batching or bellwether queue. ### Arbitration Procedure - [American Arbitration Association (AAA)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/aaa): The largest US arbitration provider, and the default forum named in most consumer clauses. - [Arbitrability](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/arbitrability): Whether a given dispute may be resolved in arbitration at all. - [Arbitral Award](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/arbitral-award): The arbitrator's binding determination of the dispute. - [Arbitration Agreement](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/arbitration-agreement): The contract term committing disputes to arbitration rather than court. - [Arbitration Clause](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/arbitration-clause): The operative text: scope, provider, rules, allocation of fees, and waivers. - [Confidentiality Provision](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/confidentiality-provision): A term restricting disclosure of proceedings, evidence, or outcomes. - [Delegation Clause](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/delegation-clause): A provision assigning questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator rather than a court. - [Discovery in Arbitration](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/discovery-in-arbitration): The limited exchange of information available in arbitral proceedings. - [Due Process (Arbitral)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/due-process): The minimum procedural fairness an arbitral scheme must afford. - [Gateway Questions](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/gateway-questions): Threshold issues of whether a valid agreement exists and whether it covers the dispute. - [Incorporation of Provider Rules](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/provider-rules-incorporation): A clause term adopting an arbitration provider's rules as part of the contract. - [JAMS](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/jams): A major US provider whose mass arbitration procedures apply only by express agreement. - [Motion to Compel Arbitration](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/motion-to-compel-arbitration): The application asking a court to enforce an arbitration agreement against a party proceeding in litigation. - [New Era ADR](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/new-era-adr): A newer arbitration provider whose mass rules were held unconscionable as applied in a leading Ninth Circuit case. - [New York Convention](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/new-york-convention): The 1958 treaty governing international recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. - [Reasoned Award](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/reasoned-award): An award setting out the arbitrator's reasoning rather than a bare result. - [Severability Clause](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/severability-clause): A term preserving the remainder of an agreement if part is held invalid. - [Vacatur](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/vacatur): Judicial annulment of an arbitral award on narrow statutory grounds. - [Waiver of Arbitration](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/waiver-of-arbitration): Loss of the right to arbitrate through conduct inconsistent with it. ### Doctrine & Statutes - [Arbitration Reform Proposals](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/policy-reform): Legislative efforts to restrict or condition pre-dispute arbitration in consumer and employment contracts. - [California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 1281.97–1281.98](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/ccp-1281-97): California's statutory deadline requiring the drafting party to pay arbitration fees within 30 days. - [Class Action Waiver](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/class-action-waiver): A term barring claimants from proceeding on a class, collective, or representative basis. - [Contract of Adhesion](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/contract-of-adhesion): A standard-form contract offered on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. - [Effective Vindication Doctrine](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/effective-vindication): The narrow principle that an arbitration clause cannot operate as a prospective waiver of federal statutory rights. - [Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/efaa): The 2022 federal statute giving claimants the option to void pre-dispute arbitration agreements for sexual assault and harassment claims. - [FAA Preemption](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/faa-preemption): The displacement of state law that obstructs enforcement of arbitration agreements. - [Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/faa): The 1925 statute making written arbitration agreements valid, irrevocable, and enforceable. - [McGill Rule](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/mcgill-rule): California's rule that a contractual waiver of the right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum is unenforceable. - [Procedural Unconscionability](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/procedural-unconscionability): Defects in how the agreement was formed: oppression and surprise. - [Substantive Unconscionability](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/substantive-unconscionability): Terms so one-sided as to shock the conscience. - [Unconscionability](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/unconscionability): The contract defence that voids terms that are both oppressively imposed and unreasonably one-sided. ### Class Actions - [Adequacy of Representation](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/adequacy): The requirement that the representative and counsel will fairly protect absent members' interests. - [Ascertainability](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/ascertainability): The implied requirement that class membership be determinable by objective criteria. - [Class Action](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/class-action): A representative action in which a named plaintiff litigates on behalf of a defined class. - [Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/cafa): The 2005 statute expanding federal jurisdiction over class actions. - [Class Certification](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/class-certification): The court order permitting a case to proceed on behalf of a class. - [Class Notice](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/class-notice): The communication informing class members of the action and their rights. - [Commonality](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/commonality): The requirement that class members share a common question capable of classwide resolution. - [Cy Pres](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/cy-pres): Distribution of undistributable class funds to a purpose approximating class members' interests. - [Named Plaintiff](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/named-plaintiff): The class member who appears of record and represents absent members. - [Numerosity](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/numerosity): The requirement that the class be so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. - [Objector](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/objector): A class member who challenges a proposed settlement at the fairness hearing. - [Opt-Out Class](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/opt-out-class): A Rule 23(b)(3) class whose members may exclude themselves and preserve individual claims. - [Predominance](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/predominance): The Rule 23(b)(3) requirement that common questions predominate over individual ones. - [Rule 23](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/rule-23): The Federal Rule of Civil Procedure governing class actions. - [Settlement Class](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/settlement-class): A class certified for settlement purposes only. - [Superiority](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/superiority): The requirement that a class action be the superior method of adjudication. - [Typicality](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/typicality): The requirement that the representative's claims be typical of the class. ### Mass Tort & MDL - [Bellwether Trial](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/bellwether-trial): A representative case tried to verdict to inform valuation of the wider inventory. - [Census Registry](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/census-registry): An early MDL mechanism capturing basic information about every claim, filed or unfiled. - [Claims Administrator](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/claims-administrator): The third party that processes claims, validates documentation, and distributes settlement funds. - [Common Benefit Fund](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/common-benefit-fund): An assessment on recoveries that compensates leadership counsel for work benefiting all claimants. - [Daubert Challenge](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/daubert): A motion to exclude expert testimony as unreliable under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. - [Defendant Fact Sheet (DFS)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/defendant-fact-sheet): The defendant's reciprocal case-specific disclosure in an MDL. - [Design Defect](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/design-defect): A claim that the product's design itself was unreasonably dangerous. - [Discovery Rule](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/discovery-rule): The principle that limitations begins to run when the claimant knew or should have known of the injury and its cause. - [Failure to Warn](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/failure-to-warn): A products claim that the manufacturer did not adequately disclose a known or knowable risk. - [General Causation](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/general-causation): Whether the substance or product is capable of causing the injury alleged. - [Global Settlement](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/global-settlement): A comprehensive resolution covering an entire claim inventory. - [Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/jpml): The seven-judge panel that decides whether and where to centralise related federal actions. - [Learned Intermediary Doctrine](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/learned-intermediary): The rule that a manufacturer's duty to warn runs to the prescribing physician, not the patient. - [Lone Pine Order](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/lone-pine-order): A case management order requiring prima facie proof of exposure, injury, and causation early on. - [Mass Tort](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/mass-tort): Large numbers of personal injury claims arising from a common product, exposure, or event. - [Medical Lien](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/medical-lien): A healthcare payer's right to reimbursement out of a claimant's recovery. - [Multidistrict Litigation (MDL)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/mdl): Federal consolidation of related civil actions before one judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings. - [Plaintiff Fact Sheet (PFS)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/plaintiff-fact-sheet): A standardised questionnaire each plaintiff completes in lieu of individual interrogatories. - [Preemption (Products)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/products-preemption): The defence that federal regulatory requirements displace state-law product claims. - [Product Identification](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/product-identification): Proof that the claimant used or was exposed to this defendant's product. - [Punitive Damages](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/punitive-damages): Damages awarded to punish and deter rather than compensate. - [Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF)](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/qualified-settlement-fund): A court-established fund under IRC § 468B that holds settlement proceeds pending allocation. - [Section 524(g) Trust](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/section-524g-trust): A bankruptcy trust that assumes asbestos liabilities under a channelling injunction. - [Settlement Matrix](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/settlement-matrix): The formula assigning settlement values to claims by injury severity and other objective factors. - [Special Master](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/special-master): A neutral appointed under Rule 53 to manage discrete aspects of complex litigation. - [Specific Causation](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/specific-causation): Whether the product actually caused this claimant's injury. - [Statute of Limitations](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/statute-of-limitations): The period within which a claim must be brought, running from accrual. - [Statute of Repose](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/statute-of-repose): An absolute outer deadline running from the defendant's conduct rather than the plaintiff's injury. - [Texas Two-Step](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/texas-two-step): A divisive merger that places tort liabilities in a new entity which then files for bankruptcy. - [Tolling Agreement](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/tolling-agreement): A contract suspending the limitations period while claims are evaluated outside litigation. ### Fees & Funding - [Arbitrator Compensation](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/arbitrator-compensation): The neutral's hourly or daily rate, allocated by rule or agreement. - [Case Management Fee](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/case-management-fee): A per-case administrative charge that historically dominated mass filing costs. - [Claim Value](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/claim-value): The expected recovery on an individual claim, discounted for risk and cost. - [Common Fund Doctrine](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/common-fund-doctrine): The equitable principle allowing counsel who create a fund to be paid from it. - [Contingency Fee](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/contingency-fee): Counsel's fee taken as a percentage of recovery, payable only on success. - [Cost-of-Defence Settlement](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/cost-of-defence-settlement): Settlement priced by the cost of resisting rather than the merits of the claim. - [Fee Shifting](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/fee-shifting): A statutory or contractual rule making one side responsible for the other's fees. - [Filing Fee](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/filing-fee): The fee payable to a provider to commence an arbitration. - [Final Fee](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/final-fee): A per-case charge assessed at the merits stage of an administered arbitration. - [Initiation Fee](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/initiation-fee): Under the AAA's post-2024 mass regime, a flat fee covering the initiation stage regardless of claim count. - [Negative-Value Claim](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/negative-value-claim): A claim worth less than the cost of pursuing it individually. - [Retainer Agreement](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/retainer-agreement): The engagement contract between claimant and counsel. - [Third-Party Litigation Funding](https://massarbitration.co/glossary/third-party-litigation-funding): Outside capital advanced against a share of litigation proceeds.