Ninth Circuit Ruling – Combs v. Netflix, Inc. (July 8, 2026)

On July 8, 2026, the Ninth Circuit issued a published decision in Combs v. Netflix, Inc. addressing when the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA) applies to employment disputes. The court ultimately held that the plaintiff’s claims remained subject to arbitration because the dispute arose before the EFAA became effective.  

Background
Jessica Combs, a former Netflix employee, alleged that she experienced a sexually hostile work environment and retaliation. She had signed an employment agreement requiring arbitration of employment disputes.
Congress enacted the EFAA, effective March 3, 2022, which makes pre-dispute arbitration agreements unenforceable for cases involving sexual assault or sexual harassment disputes. The central question was when the “dispute” arose for purposes of the statute.  

The Issue
Combs argued:

• The dispute did not arise until she filed her administrative complaint (or otherwise formally asserted legal claims), which occurred after the EFAA became effective.
• Therefore, she should be entitled to litigate in court rather than arbitrate.

Netflix argued:

• The dispute began much earlier, when Combs made internal complaints of harassment and the parties disagreed about those allegations.
• Because that occurred before March 3, 2022, the EFAA did not apply.  

The Ninth Circuit’s Holding
The Ninth Circuit agreed with Netflix.
The court concluded that:

• A “dispute” exists when there is an actual disagreement between employer and employee over the alleged conduct.
• The dispute is not delayed until an employee files an administrative charge or lawsuit.
• Because Combs had already complained internally before the EFAA became effective, the dispute predated the statute.
• As a result, the arbitration agreement remained enforceable.  

Why This Matters
This decision is significant because it narrows the availability of the EFAA in cases involving conduct that began before March 3, 2022.
The opinion signals that courts in the Ninth Circuit will focus on:

• when the parties first became adverse,
• whether the employer had notice of the allegations,
• whether there was an actual disagreement before the EFAA’s effective date,

rather than simply looking at the filing date of the lawsuit or administrative charge.  

Practical Impact for Employers
For employers, the decision means:

• Existing arbitration agreements may still be enforceable for harassment disputes that arose before March 3, 2022.
• Internal complaint records become even more important because they may establish when the dispute first arose.
• Employers should carefully preserve investigation files and complaint timelines.

Practical Impact for Employees
Employees seeking to invoke the EFAA must be prepared to address:

• when they first complained,
• when the employer first denied or rejected those complaints,
• whether the parties were already in an active dispute before March 3, 2022.

How This Fits with Other Recent EFAA Cases
The Ninth Circuit’s decision addresses when the EFAA applies. A separate issue that has divided courts is what happens once the EFAA does apply. For example, the Sixth Circuit recently held that if the EFAA applies, it generally removes the entire case from arbitration, not just the sexual harassment claims. Thus:

• Combs (Ninth Circuit): focuses on whether the EFAA is triggered at all.
• Bruce v. Adams & Reese (Sixth Circuit): focuses on the scope of the EFAA after it is triggered.  

For an employment litigator, Combs is an important opinion because it establishes that the EFAA’s applicability turns on the timing of the underlying dispute, not merely the timing of the lawsuit. That makes the chronology of internal complaints, employer responses, and workplace investigations a potentially dispositive issue in future motions to compel arbitration.