O'Connor et al v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 143

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 139 to Dismiss Plaintiff David Khan filed by Thomas Colopy, Douglas O'Connor. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/17/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
ROBERT JON HENDRICKS (SBN 179751)
STEPHEN L. TAEUSCH (SBN 247708)
CAITLIN V. MAY (SBN 293141)
One Market, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.442.1001
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
SHANNON LISS-RIORDAN, pro hac vice
([e-mail])
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
MONIQUE OLIVIER (SBN 190385)
([e-mail])
DUCKWORTH, PETERS, LEBOWITZ, OLIVIER LLP
100 Bush Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
DOUGLAS O’CONNOR, THOMAS COLOPY,
DAVID KHAN, MATTHEW MANAHAN, WILSON
ROLLE, JR., and WILLIAM ANDERSON

18
19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

20

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

21
22
23

DOUGLAS O’CONNOR, THOMAS
COLOPY, DAVID KHAN, MATTHEW
MANAHAN, WILSON ROLLE, JR., and
WILLIAM ANDERSON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,

24

Plaintiffs,

25

STIPULATION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF
DAVID KHAN WITH PREJUDICE
PURSUANT TO FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii)

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

27

Hon. Edward M. Chen

v.

26

Case No. 13-03826-EMC

Defendant.

28

M ORGAN , L EWIS &
B OCKIUS LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
SAN FRA NCI S CO

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. 13-03826-EMC

1

This stipulation is entered into pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of

2

Civil Procedure, by and between Plaintiff David Khan (“Khan”) and Defendant Uber

3

Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”) (collectively, the “Parties”).

4
5
6
7

STIPULATION
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and among the Parties to this
Stipulation, through their respective counsel of record, that:
1.

The Parties hereby warrant that each person whose signature appears hereon has

8

been duly authorized and has full authority to execute this Stipulation on behalf of each of the

9

Parties hereto;

10
11
12

2.

Khan shall be dismissed with prejudice as a party plaintiff in the above-captioned

action against Uber pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
3.

The Parties shall bear their own respective costs and attorneys’ fees related to and

13

associated with the claims alleged by Khan, the litigation of those claims, and the dismissal of

14

those claims.

15

Dated: September 10, 2014

LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.

16

By:

17
18

Dated: September 10, 2014

/s/ Shannon Liss-Riordan
Shannon Liss-Riordan, pro hac vice
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

19

By /s/Robert Jon Hendricks
Robert Jon Hendricks
Attorneys for Defendant

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

M ORGAN , L EWIS &
B OCKIUS LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
SAN FRA NCI S CO

1

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. 13-03826-EMC

1
2
ORDER
3
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED

5

against Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc., pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure.

S
9/17/14

10

RT

12

DB2/ 25302569.1

dward
Judge E

NO

11

_________________________________________
ERED
Edward M. Chen ORD
S SO
IT I
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ER

H

13
14

R NIA

Dated:

n

M. Che

FO

9

RT
U
O

8

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

LI

7

Khan is hereby dismissed with prejudice as a party plaintiff in the above-captioned lawsuit

A

6

UNIT
ED

4

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

M ORGAN , L EWIS &
B OCKIUS LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
SAN FRA NCI S CO

2

STIPULATION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. 13-03826-EMC