Ehret v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Filing 125

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 124 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER on Content of Class Notice and Timeline for Sending Notice to the Class filed by Caren Ehret. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/12/16. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/12/2016)

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124 Filed 01/07/16 Page 1 of 3

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

Myron M. Cherry (SBN 50278)
[e-mail]
Jacie C. Zolna (pro hac vice,
Illinois ARDC #6278781)
[e-mail]
MYRON M. CHERRY & ASSOCIATES LLC
30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2300
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Stephen A. Swedlow (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Amit B. Patel
[e-mail]
QUINN, EMANUEL, URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
500 West Madison Street, Suite 2450
Chicago, Illinois 60661
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Hall Adams (pro hac vice,
Illinois ARDC #6194886)
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF HALL ADAMS, LLC
33 North Dearborn Street, Suite 2350
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Arthur Miles Roberts (SBN 275272)
[e-mail]
QUINN, EMANUEL, URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant Uber
Technologies, Inc.

Michael Ram (SBN 104805)
[e-mail]
RAM, OLSON, CEREGHINO & KOPCZYNSKI LLP
555 Montgomery Street, Suite 820
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class

18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

19
20

22

CAREN EHRET, individually and on
behalf of a class of similarly situated
individuals,

23

Plaintiff,

21

24
25
26
27
28

v.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a
Delaware Corporation,
Defendant.

)
)
) Case No. 3:14-cv-113-EMC
)
)
) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON
) CONTENT OF CLASS NOTICE AND TIMELINE
) FOR SENDING NOTICE TO THE CLASS
)
)
)
)
)

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124 Filed 01/07/16 Page 2 of 3

1

Pursuant to the Court’s December 2, 2015 Order, the undersigned counsel of record for

2

Plaintiff Caren Ehret (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Defendant”)

3

(collectively, the “Parties”) stipulate and agree as follows:

4

WHEREAS, on December 2, 2015, the Court granted in part and denied in part

5

Plaintiff’s motion for class certification and ordered the parties to meet and confer “regarding the

6

contents and logistics of class notice and other relevant procedural details” and to “stipulate to

7

form of class notice and a proposed timeline”;

8
9

WHEREAS, the parties have conferred and have agreed upon the form of a class notice,
a copy of which is attached hereto, and a timeline for sending said notice to the class;

10

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, that the class notice attached hereto is

11

approved by the Court. The claims administrator shall send the class notice to all class members

12

via email within 60 days after the Court approves and enters this stipulation and order.

13

In accordance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filer of this document hereby attests that the

14

concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatories hereto.

15

Dated: January 7, 2016
MYRON M. CHERRY & ASSOCIATES LLC
JACIE C. ZOLNA (admitted pro hac vice)

16
17

By: ______/s/ Jacie C. Zolna__________
Jacie C. Zolna
Attorney for Plaintiff Caren Ehret

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: January 7, 2016
QUINN, EMANUEL, URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
ARTHUR M. ROBERTS (SBN 275272)
By: ______/s/ Arthur M. Roberts________
Arthur M. Roberts
Attorney for Defendant
Uber Technologies, Inc.

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124 Filed 01/07/16 Page 3 of 3

1

PURSUANT TO THIS STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

2

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ER

H

10

RT

9

NO

8

R NIA

7

ERED

__________________________________________
O ORD
IT IS S
HON. EDWARD M. CHEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
en
d M. Ch
e Edwar
Judg

FO

6

LI

5

UNIT
ED

S

Dated:___________________

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

4

1/12/16

A

3

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124-1 Filed 01/07/16 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
CAREN EHRET, individually and on
behalf of a class of similarly situated
individuals,
Plaintiff,
v.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a
Delaware Corporation,
Defendant.

)
)
) Case No. 3:14-cv-113-EMC
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. THIS NOTICE RELATES
TO THE PENDENCY OF A CLASS ACTION AND IT CONTAINS
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS.
TO:

All class members (as defined below)

A.

What is this Notice about?

This Notice is being sent to notify you of a class action lawsuit pending in Federal Court
in San Francisco, California (the “Lawsuit”). Plaintiff Caren Ehret brought this lawsuit against
Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”) regarding the manner in which Uber represented a 20% charge
for rides requested through Uber’s “uberTAXI” request option. Plaintiff alleges that from April
2012 to March 2013, Uber represented to users of Uber’s application that a “gratuity” would be
automatically added at a set percentage of the metered fare. Plaintiff alleges that this
representation was misleading because Plaintiff claims Uber retained a portion of what was
represented as a “gratuity.” Uber claims these allegations are inaccurate and contends that it did
not retain any identifiable portion of money that was labeled as a “gratuity.”
On December 2, 2015, the Court certified this case as a class action under both the
California Unfair Competition Law and the California Legal Remedies Act. You have received
this Notice because you may be a class member. The purpose of this Notice is to inform you of
the lawsuit and how it may affect you. In addition, this Notice will advise you of what to do if
you want to remain a part of the lawsuit, what to do if you want to exclude yourself from the
lawsuit, and how joining or not joining the lawsuit may affect your legal rights.
This Notice is not intended to be, and should not be taken as, an expression of any
opinion by the Court on the merits of the claims or defenses asserted in this case. Neither the

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124-1 Filed 01/07/16 Page 2 of 4

Court nor a jury has yet determined whether Plaintiff’s claims, or Uber’s defenses, are true. This
Notice is merely sent to notify class members of the pendency of the case and the rights of all
class members.
B.

What is a class action lawsuit?

A class action lawsuit is a legal action in which one or more people represent a large
group, or class of people. The purpose of a class action lawsuit is to resolve at one time similar
legal claims of the members of the group.
C.

What is the class in this case?

On December 2, 2015, the Court certified this case as a class action. The Court certified
and defined the class as follows:
“All individuals who received Uber’s e-mail with the representation that the 20% charge
would be gratuity only, who then arranged and paid for taxi rides through Uber’s service
from April 20, 2012 to March 25, 2013.”
This lawsuit only relates to one of Uber’s ride request options: uberTAXI. This lawsuit does not
relate to UberBlack, uberX, or any other of Uber’s ride request options.
D.

What are your options?

If you believe you meet the class definition above, you have two options: (1) You can
remain a member of the class; (2) You can request exclusion (“opt out”) of the class.
1.

Remain in the class.
a. If you are a member of the class and do not specifically request exclusion
from the class in accordance with the procedure outlined below, you will
automatically remain a member of the class. Thus, you do not need to take
any action at this time to remain a member of the class.
b. If you remain a member of the class, you will be represented by Plaintiff and
court-appointed Class Counsel, unless you enter an appearance through
counsel of your own choice and at your own expense. You are not required to
obtain your own counsel. If you choose to do so, your counsel must file an
appearance on your behalf and mail copies of such appearance to the attorneys
listed in paragraph E below.
c. If you remain a member of the class, you will be bound by any judgment in
this case, whether favorable or unfavorable. As a member of the class you
may share in the recovery, if any, and you will not have to prosecute your own
claim. If judgment is entered in favor of Uber, the class will be denied any
recovery.
2

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124-1 Filed 01/07/16 Page 3 of 4

d. By remaining in the class, you will not subject yourself to any obligation to
pay the costs of the case.
2.

Exclude yourself from the case, i.e., opt out of the class.
a. Any class member has the right to be excluded from the class by request. If
you wish to exclude yourself from this case you must request, in writing by
letter or email, to be excluded. All requests should include your name,
address, email address, the case name (“Ehret v. Uber”) and a statement that
you wish to be excluded from the class. This Request for Exclusion must be
emailed or postmarked within 45 days of the date of this Notice (by [INSERT
DATE]) and sent to the following address:
[Insert third-party administrator]

b. If your timely Request for Exclusion is received by [Insert third-party
administrator], you will be excluded from the case, i.e., from the class. If
excluded, you will not be bound by the results of the litigation and you will
not be eligible to receive any portion of damages, if any, that may be awarded
to the class.
E.

Who are the lawyers for the Plaintiff?

The Court appointed Myron M. Cherry and Jacie C. Zolna of Myron M. Cherry &
Associates, LLC, Hall Adams of the Law Offices of Hall Adams LLC and Michael Ram of Ram,
Olson, Cereghino & Kopczynski LLP as Class Counsel. Class Counsel may work with other
attorneys in prosecuting this case. Class Counsel (and any other attorneys working with them)
are working on a contingency basis, which means they will be paid attorneys’ fees for their work
only if the Plaintiff recovers, by settlement or otherwise, in this lawsuit. If the Plaintiff recovers,
Class Counsel will be paid attorneys’ fees in a manner approved by the Court. If Plaintiff does
not win or settle the case, Class Counsel will not be paid any attorneys’ fees.
Class Counsel:
Myron M. Cherry
[e-mail]
Jacie C. Zolna
[e-mail]
Myron M. Cherry & Associates, LLC
30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2300
Chicago, Illinois 60602
[phone] (telephone)
[phone] (facsimile)

3

Case 3:14-cv-00113-EMC Document 124-1 Filed 01/07/16 Page 4 of 4

Hall Adams
[e-mail]
Law Offices of Hall Adams
33 North Dearborn Street Suite 2350
Chicago, Illinois 60602
312-445-4900 (telephone)
312-445-4901 (facsimile)
Michael Ram
[e-mail]
Ram, Olson, Cereghino & Kopczynski LLP
555 Montgomery St., #820
San Francisco, California 94111
[phone] (telephone)
[phone] (facsimile)
F.

Where can you get more information about this lawsuit?

If you have any questions about the case, please submit your questions in writing to
[Insert third-party administrator] or call them at [Insert telephone number]. For more
details on the case, you may also examine the court file at the office of the Clerk of the Court at
450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102. PLEASE DO NOT CALL THE
COURT CLERK’S OFFICE.
Dated: _________________

BY ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4