With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". it was information about this litigation that Chase and Citibank omitted from their change of terms notices. V. Plaintiffs’ Allegations of Collusion by Defendants Plaintiffs assert that this Court should invalidate all arbitration clauses because them incorporation into cardhol collusion combined with a waiver of class remedies renders the contracts unconscionable is also without merit. Plaintiffs cite no authority from any relevant state court. Instead, they offer California law, which does not govern any of the arbitration agreements. (Pl. Mem. at 18 (citing Ting v. AT&T, 319 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir.2003) (applying California law)).) Agreements to waive class remedies are enforceable. See, e.g., Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 111 S.Ct. 1647, 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991) (<HOLDING>); Carter v. Countrywide Credit Indus., Inc.,

A: holding that tila does not create a nonwaivable right to sue as a class
B: holding that claims arising under the age discrimination in employment act may be subject to arbitration
C: holding that one may waive his right to sue as a class even though the age discrimination in employment act adea expressly references a right to class remedies
D: holding that the age discrimination in employment act was not preempted by the nlra
C.