This provision requires that claims be brought individually and prohibits class, representative, or collective actions against Superhuman, with an exception permitting batch arbitration procedures under Section 12.6.
This analysis describes what Grammarly's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
Users cannot pool claims with others against Superhuman, which limits the practical ability to pursue low-value individual claims and eliminates class-action leverage.
Interpretive note: The clause name references a jury trial waiver, but no such language appears in the provided excerpt. The canonical claim and all derived fields are limited to the class/collective action waiver language present in the excerpt.
Under this clause, consumers are required to pursue any claims against Superhuman individually rather than as part of a class or collective action, which may affect the practical cost-benefit of pursuing low-value claims. The batch arbitration mechanism in Section 12.6 provides a limited alternative for similar claims.
How other platforms handle this
If, however, this Class Action Waiver is deemed invalid or unenforceable with respect to a particular Dispute...neither you nor Chegg will be entitled to arbitration of such Dispute.
Neither you nor we may elect arbitration of any claims seeking only individualized relief asserted by you or us in small claims court, so long as the action remains in that court and is not removed or appealed de novo...
Monitoring
Grammarly has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"You and Superhuman agree that each of us may bring claims against the other only on an individual basis, and not on a class, representative, or collective basis (and we each waive any right we have to bring such claims).— Excerpt from Grammarly's Grammarly Terms of Service
1. REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Class action waivers in consumer contracts are subject to scrutiny under the FTC Act and relevant state consumer protection statutes. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has addressed class action waivers in financial services contexts, though Superhuman is not a financial services provider. State attorneys general in California have authority to challenge class action waivers under California consumer protection law. 2. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The combination of mandatory individual arbitration and class action waiver substantially limits the practical ability of individual consumers to pursue low-value claims, which is a well-documented pattern in consumer contract enforcement. The severability language in Section 12.3 provides that if the class waiver is found unenforceable as to a specific claim, that claim may proceed in court. 3. JURISDICTION FLAGS: California courts and the California Supreme Court have addressed class action waivers in consumer contracts and their interaction with the FAA. EU/EEA users are explicitly excluded. Illinois, New York, and other states may have additional consumer protection provisions that affect enforceability. 4. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise customers operating under the separate Customer Business Agreement should confirm whether the class waiver applies to their context. The batch arbitration provision in Section 12.6 may be relevant for mass filing scenarios and should be reviewed for operational implications. 5. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should assess whether the class action waiver is adequately disclosed at onboarding and whether state-specific disclosures are required. The severability clause in Section 12.3 should be noted in any contractual risk assessment.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 3 platforms + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Coinbase's User Agreement includes a mandatory arbitration clause that most users may not have reviewed. Here is what the clause states and how the opt-out process works.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
Users cannot pool claims with others against Superhuman, which limits the practical ability to pursue low-value individual claims and eliminates class-action leverage.
Under this clause, consumers are required to pursue any claims against Superhuman individually rather than as part of a class or collective action, which may affect the practical cost-benefit of pursuing low-value claims. The batch arbitration mechanism in Section 12.6 provides a limited alternative for similar claims.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 207 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Grammarly.