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

Filing 752

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES filed by Uber Technologies, Inc., Travis Kalanick. Case Management Statement due by 10/11/2016. Further Case Management Conference set for Tuesday 10/18/2016 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/26/16. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/26/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 SHANNON LISS-RIORDAN, pro hac vice ADELAIDE PAGANO, pro hac vice LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 Facsimile: (617) 994-5801 sliss@llrlaw.com apagano@llrlaw.com GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP THEODORE J. BOUTROUS, JR., SBN 132099 tboutrous@gibsondunn.com THEANE D. EVANGELIS, SBN 243570 tevangelis@gibsondunn.com DHANANJAY S. MANTHRIPRAGADA, SBN 254433 dmanthripragada@gibsondunn.com 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197 Telephone: 213.229.7000 Facsimile: 213.229.7520 MATTHEW CARLSON (SBN 273242) LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 466 Geary St., Suite 201 San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 Facsimile: (617) 994-5801 mcarlson@llrlaw.com JOSHUA S. LIPSHUTZ, SBN 242557 jlipshutz@gibsondunn.com KEVIN J. RING-DOWELL, SBN 278289 kringdowell@gibsondunn.com 555 Mission Street, Suite 3000 San Francisco, CA 94105-0921 Telephone: 415.393.8200 Facsimile: 415.393.8306 Attorneys for O’Connor Plaintiffs THOMAS COLOPY, MATTHEW MANAHAN, and ELIE GURFINKEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Attorneys for Yucesoy Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendants UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and TRAVIS KALANICK 15 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CASE NO. 13-cv-03826-EMC CASE NO. 15-cv-00262-EMC DOUGLAS O’CONNOR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JOINT STIPULATION TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant. Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen HAKAN YUCESOY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al. Defendant. 27 28 1 JOINT STIPULATION TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES CASE NO. CV 13-03826-EMC; CASE NO. CV 15-00262-EMC 1 JOINT STIPULATION TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES 2 O’Connor Plaintiffs Thomas Colopy, Matthew Manahan, and Elie Gurfinkel, individually and 3 on behalf of all others similarly situated, Yucesoy Plaintiffs Hakan Yucesoy, Abdi Mahammed, 4 Mokhtar Talha, Brian Morris, and Pedro Sanchez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly 5 situated (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”) and Travis 6 Kalanick (as to Yucesoy only) (collectively, “Defendants”), by and through their respective counsel of 7 record, hereby stipulate as follows: 8 WHEREAS, on April 21, 2016, Plaintiffs filed motions for preliminary settlement approval in 9 O’Connor v. Uber Techs., Inc., 13-cv-03826-EMC (N.D. Cal.) and Yucesoy v. Uber Techs., Inc., No. 10 11 12 15-cv-00262-EMC (N.D. Cal.), see O’Connor, Dkt. 518; Yucesoy Dkt. 206; WHEREAS, on August 18, 2016, this Court denied Plaintiffs’ motions for preliminary settlement approval, see O’Connor, Dkt. 748; Yucesoy Dkt. 240; 13 WHEREAS, in its order denying preliminary settlement approval, the Court directed the 14 parties to submit a joint status report on September 8, 2016 and scheduled a status conference for 15 September 15, 2016 at 10:30 a.m., see O’Connor, Dkt. 748 at 35; Yucesoy Dkt. 240 at 35; 16 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ lead counsel has an oral argument scheduled in the United States 17 Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on September 15, 2016 and Defendants’ lead counsel has an 18 oral argument scheduled in the California Court of Appeal on September 15, 2016; 19 WHEREAS, both Plaintiffs’ lead counsel and Defendants’ lead counsel have a variety of oral 20 arguments and trial-related commitments in the weeks immediately preceding and immediately 21 following September 15, 2016; 22 WHEREAS, the Parties are continuing to discuss potential settlement possibilities for 23 O’Connor and Yucesoy, in light of the Court’s order denying preliminary settlement approval. 24 NOW THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate, subject to the approval of this Court, that October 18, 2016 the Status Conference in O’Connor and Yucesoy will be rescheduled to October 13, 2016 at 10:30 11 a.m. and the joint status report shall be due on October 6, 2016. 25 26 27 IT IS SO STIPULATED 28 2 JOINT STIPULATION TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES CASE NO. CV 13-03826-EMC; CASE NO. CV 15-00262-EMC 1 2 Dated: August 23, 2016 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 3 By: 4 5 Attorney for Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc. and Travis Kalanick 6 7 /s/ Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. Dated: August 23, 2016 LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 8 By: 9 10 /s/ Shannon Liss-Riordan Shannon Liss-Riordan Attorneys for O’Connor Plaintiffs Thomas Colopy, Matthew Manahan, and Elie Gurfinkel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Attorneys for Yucesoy Plaintiffs 11 12 13 14 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 20 DERED SO OR ED IT IS _________________ DIFI AS MO R NIA August 26 Dated: ______________, 2016 21 RT 22 ER H 23 24 FO NO The Honorable Edward M. Chen United States District Judgehen C ard M. dge Edw Ju LI 19 UNIT ED 18 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O S 17 (as modified on p.2) A 15 [PROPOSED] ORDER N F D IS T IC T O R 25 26 27 28 3 JOINT STIPULATION TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES CASE NO. CV 13-03826-EMC; CASE NO. CV 15-00262-EMC C 1 ECF ATTESTATION 2 I hereby attest that I have on file all holographic signatures corresponding to any signatures indicated by a conformed signature (/s/) within this e-filed document. 3 4 5 By: /s/ Kevin Ring-Dowell Kevin Ring-Dowell 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 JOINT STIPULATION TO CHANGE STATUS CONFERENCE DEADLINES CASE NO. CV 13-03826-EMC; CASE NO. CV 15-00262-EMC

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?