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

Filing 949

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying Without Prejudice 946 Plaintiff's Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/21/2019)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DOUGLAS O'CONNOR, et al., Plaintiffs, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Case No. 13-cv-03826-EMC v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants. ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED Docket No. 946 13 14 Plaintiff S. Patrick Mendel filed an administrative motion to consider whether Mendel v. 15 Chao, No. 19-cv-3244 (N.D. Cal. filed June 7, 2019), currently assigned to Judge White, should 16 be related to O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 13-cv-3826 (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 16, 17 2013), before this Court. Docket No. 946. However, Plaintiff has not yet served the Defendants 18 in Mendel with summons and copies of the complaint in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil 19 Procedure 4(c). Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1) (“A summons must be served with a copy of the 20 complaint. The plaintiff is responsible for having the summons and complaint served within the 21 time allowed by Rule 4(m) and must furnish the necessary copies to the person who makes 22 service.”). Nor has Plaintiff served Defendants in Mendel with copies of the instant motion in 23 accordance with Local Rule 3-12(b) to allow them an opportunity to respond. N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 24 3-12(b) (“[A] copy of the motion [to relate], together with proof of service pursuant to Civil L.R. 25 5-5, must be served on all known parties to each apparently related action.”). 26 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to relate is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff may 27 refile the motion once the Mendel Defendants have been served in compliance with Rule 4(c) and 28 Local Rule 3-12(b). If he does so, Plaintiff should ensure that the motion does not exceed 5 pages. 1 See N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-11(a) (“A motion for an order concerning a miscellaneous 2 administrative matter may not exceed 5 pages (not counting declarations and exhibits) . . . .”). 3 This order disposes of Docket No. 946. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: June 21, 2019 8 9 10 ______________________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?