David KARDONICK, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated and the general public, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITIGROUP, INC., Citicorp USA, Inc., Citibank South Dakota, N.A., Defendants-Appellants, 449 F. App'x 878

PER CURIAM: Citigroup, Inc., Citicorp USA, Inc., and Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. (“Citibank”) appeal the district court’s order denying their motion to compel arbitration in this matter, a purported class action brought by David Kardonick. The district court determined that the arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable. At the time the district court made its ruling in this case, it was without the benefit of the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 1740, 179 L.Ed.2d 742 (2011) and our decision in Cruz v.

Cingular Wireless, LLC, 648 F.3d 1205, 1207 (11th Cir.2011), where we held that in light of Concepcion, the class action waiver and the plaintiffs’ arbitration agreement is enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act. Because we believe it prudent for the district court to reconsider its order in the first instance, especially in light of Concepcion and Cruz, we vacate the district court’s order denying Citibank’s motion to compel arbitration and remand this case for the district court to reconsider its order in light of Concepcion and Cruz. VACATED and REMANDED. . This is an unlimited remand.