Distinguishing Monster Energy Co. v. City Beverages, LLC (9th Cir. 2019) 940 F.3d 1130 as interpreting federal, not California law, and involving a one-time litigant against a repeat player, this decision holds that in a commercial, non-consumer, arbitration, California law does not require an arbitrator to disclose his 0.1 percent interest in JAMS.  Arbitrators are required to disclose their relationship with arbitration providers in consumer cases, but not commercial cases.  No reasonable person would doubt the arbitrator’s neutrality based on his small ownership interest in JAMS, particularly as the two large law firms that represented the opposing parties in this case had used JAMS the same number of times over the past five years in other litigation.  Speier could have disqualified the arbitrator without cause within 15 days of receiving his initial disclosures.  Having chosen not to do so, Speier could not disqualify the arbitrator after the award.