Following but distinguishing Sellers v. JustAnswer LLC (2021) 73 Cal.App.5th 543, this decision holds that Blizzard employed a form of sign-in wrap to show consent to its agreement for use of its website and games.  In the context of a continuing relationship to play Blizzard’s games, its sign-in wrap adequately informed users that they had to agree to its terms in order to use its games.  The page on which they indicated consent by pressing a “continue” button conspicuously warned that agreement to all terms and conditions was required to play and that one of those terms was agreement to arbitrate disputes including a class action waiver.  And, the page also allowed the consumer to scroll through the entire agreement which contained a hyperlink to the arbitration agreement. By clicking the continue button, plaintiff consented to the arbitration agreement despite not having read it. The arbitration agreement delegated to the arbitrator disputes about the scope or enforceability of the arbitration agreement including the class action waiver and attorney general carve-out.  Hence, the plaintiff’s McGill challenge had to be decided by the arbitrator.  This was true even though some other provisions of the arbitration agreement indicated that a court might, under some circumstances, decide the effectiveness of the class action waiver.)