Todd Johnston v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Filing 97

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 96 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Continue September 13, 2018 Case Management Conference filed by Uber Technologies, Inc. Case Management Statement due by 10/18/2018. Further Case Management Conference reset for 10/25/2018 01:30 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom 05, 17th Floor. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/17/18. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/17/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ANDREW M. SPURCHISE, Bar No. 245998 aspurchise@littler.com LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 900 Third Avenue New York, New York 10022.3298 Telephone: 212.583.9600 Facsimile: 212.832.2719 SOPHIA BEHNIA, Bar No. 289318 sbehnia@littler.com LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 333 Bush Street, 34th Floor San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: 415.433.1940 Facsimile: 415.399.8490 Attorneys for Defendant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. [Additional Counsel Listed on Following Page] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 TODD JOHNSTON, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Case No. 3:16-CV-03134-EMC JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Current CMC Date: September 13, 2018 Current CMC Time: 10:30 a.m. Complaint Filed: June 9, 2016 Defendant. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 2049 CENTURY PARK EAST 5TH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 310.553.0308 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 CASE NO. 3:16-CV-03134-EMC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 THE BRANDI LAW FIRM Thomas J. Brandi, SBN 53208 tjb@brandilaw.com Brian J. Malloy, SBN 234882 bjm@brandilaw.com 354 Pine Street, Third Floor San Francisco, CA 941 04 Telephone: 415.989.1800 SLACK & DAVIS, LLP Michael L. Slack, pro hac vice mslack@slackdavis. com John R. Davis, SBN 308412 jdavis@slackdavis .com 2705 Bee Cave Road, Suite 220 Austin, TX 78746 Attorneys for Plaintiff TODD JOHNSTON 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 2049 CENTURY PARK EAST 5TH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 310.553.0308 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 CASE NO. 3:16-CV-03134-EMC STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 1 2 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, Plaintiff Todd Johnston (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Uber 3 Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”) (Plaintiff and Defendant are collectively referred to as “the Parties”), by 4 and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 5 WHEREAS, on June 22, 2017, the Court stayed the above-captioned case pending the 6 outcome of various appeals in O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 7 Case Nos. 14-16078, et al. related to the enforceability of arbitration agreements at issue in this case; 8 WHEREAS, on September 22, 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed O’Connor v. 9 Uber Technologies, Inc., Case Nos. 14-16078, et al. pending Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 834 10 F.3d 975 (9th Cir. 2016), cert. granted (U.S. Jan. 13, 2017) (No. 16-300) (“Morris”), consolidated 11 with Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 823 F.3d 1147 (7th Cir. 2016), cert. granted (U.S. Jan. 13, 2017) (No. 12 16-285) and Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. NLRB, 808 F.3d 1013 (5th Cir. 2015) cert. granted (U.S. Jan. 13 13, 2017) (No. 16-307) (collectively, “Morris, et al.”); 14 15 WHEREAS, on May 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Morris, et al.; and 16 WHEREAS, as a result of meet and confer efforts, the Parties agree that the September 13, 17 2018 Case Management Conference should be continued to October 25, 2018 pending the resolution 18 of the O’Connor appeals at the Ninth Circuit. 19 NOW THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate, subject to the approval of this Court, that: 20 1. 21 The Case Management Conference set for September 13, 2018, at 10:30 a.m., shall be continued to October 25, 2018. 22 2. Case Management Conference Statements shall be due on October 18, 2018. 23 3. The above-captioned case shall remain STAYED until the next Case Management 24 Conference. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 2049 CENTURY PARK EAST 5TH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 310.553.0308 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 3 CASE NO. 3:16-CV-03134-EMC 1 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 2 3 Dated: August 16, 2018 Respectfully submitted, 4 /s/ Sophia Behnia SOPHIA BEHNIA LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Attorneys for Defendant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 5 6 7 8 Dated: August 16, 2018 9 /s/ John R. Davis JOHN R. DAVIS SLACK & DAVIS, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff TODD JOHNSTON 10 11 12 13 14 15 I, Sophia Behnia, hereby attest that Mr. Davis, on whose behalf the filing is submitted, concurs in the filing’s content and has authorized the filing. /s/ Sophia Behnia 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 2049 CENTURY PARK EAST 5TH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 310.553.0308 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 4. CASE NO. 3:16-CV-03134-EMC [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 2 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 1. 4 The Case Management Conference set for September 13, 2018, at 10:30 a.m., shall be continued to October 25, 2018 at 10:30 a.m. 1:30 p.m. 5 2. Case Management Conference Statements shall be due on October 18, 2018. 6 3. The above-captioned case shall remain STAYED until the next Case Management Conference. S 11 NO RT 12 United States District Judge hen rd M. C ge Edwa Jud ER H 13 14 R NIA , 2018 FO Dated: ERED O ORD D IT IS S DIFIE AS MO The Honorable Edward M. Chen A 10 8/17 LI 9 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 UNIT ED 7 N F D IS T IC T O R C 15 16 17 18 Firmwide:156532376.2 073208.1219 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 2049 CENTURY PARK EAST 5TH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 310.553.0308 JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 5. CASE NO. 3:16-CV-03134-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?