Ya Mon Expeditions, LLC v. YATCO, LLC

── Ya Mon Expeditions, LLC v. YATCO, LLC ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: June 10, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-10140 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 06/10/2026 Page: 1 of 22 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-10140 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ YA MON EXPEDITIONS, LLC, KIP LAMAR SNELL, Plaintiffs-Appellees, MAGNA CHARTER, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, versus INTERNATIONAL YACHT BROKERS ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., Defendants, YATCO, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Defendant-Appellant. USCA11 Case: 25-10140 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 06/10/2026 Page: 2 of 22 2 Opinion of the Court 25-10140 ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-20805-KMM ____________________ Before JORDAN, KIDD, and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This interlocutory appeal arises from class-action antitrust litigation concerning an alleged conspiracy in the used yacht resale market to fix and inflate the commissions that sellers of used yachts must pay to brokers representing buyers. The only issue before us in this appeal is whether one of the defendants who allegedly par- ticipated in this conspiracy, YATCO, LLC (“YATCO”), can compel the plaintiffs to arbitrate their antitrust claims against it based on an agreement that the plaintiffs’ brokers purportedly accepted with YATCO. The district court concluded that YATCO could not compel arbitration because the plaintiffs were not bound by the arbitration provision in the agreement. After review, 1 we affirm the district court’s denial of YATCO’s motion to compel arbitration. 2 1 “We review de novo a district court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitra- tion.” Kroma Makeup EU, LLC v. Boldface Licensing + Branding, Inc., 845 F.3d 1351, 1354 (11th Cir. 2017). 2 We have jurisdiction under the Federal Arbitration Act to review an inter- locutory order “denying a petition . . . to order arbitration to proceed.” 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(B). USCA11 Case: 25-10140 Document: 39-1 Date Filed: 06/10/2026 Page: 3 of 22 25-10140 Opinion of the Court 3 I. BACKGROUND The plaintiffs in this case are companies and individuals who sold used yachts through brokers at some point from approxi- mately 2020 to 2023. The plaintiffs filed in the Southern District of Florida four separate class-action complaints alleging antitrust vio- lations against a variety of defendants involved in the used yacht resale market, which the district court consolidated into a single case. In June 2024, the plaintiffs filed a single, joint complaint in the consolidated case. In their consolidated class-action complaint, the plaintiffs sued the following defendants for violations of the Sherman Anti- trust Act of 1890, 15 U.S.C. § 1: (1) yacht brokerage companies that represented buyers and sellers of used yachts; (2) yacht broke