Fridman v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Filing 54

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. GRANTING (Docket Nos. 39 in case 4:18-cv-02931-HSG; 33 in case 4:18-cv-03829-HSG and 19 in case 4:18-cv-04538-HSG) SIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED ACTIONS.(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2018)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

LUCIUS MANNING,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

v.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE

UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC.,
Defendant.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 18-cv-02931-HSG

Re: Dkt. No. 39

12
13

CARLA VARIO,
Plaintiff,

14
15
16

Case No. 18-cv-03829-HSG

v.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 33

Defendant.

17
18
19

SHELTON BOLLINGER,
Plaintiff,

20
21
22
23

Case No. 18-cv-04538-HSG

v.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 19

Defendant.

24
25

GOOD CAUSE appearing, the cases captioned Lucius Manning v. Uber Technologies,

26

Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv-02931-HSG; Carla Vario v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv-

27

03829-HSG; and Shelton Bollinger v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv-04538-HSG, are

28

hereby consolidated for all pretrial and trial proceedings. The earliest-filed civil action, Case No.

1

4:18-cv-02931-HSG, shall serve as the lead case. The clerk is directed to administratively close

2

the later-filed civil actions, Case Nos. 4:18-cv-03829-HSG and 4:18-cv-04538-HSG. All future

3

filings should be done in the lead case (Case No. 4:18-cv-02931-HSG) only and should be

4

captioned “In Re Uber Text Messaging.”

5

This order of consolidation also applies to any other cases that are subsequently filed in,

6

removed to, or transferred to this Court involving the same or substantially similar issues of law

7

and fact as In Re Uber Text Messaging.
A Consolidated Complaint shall be filed within seven (7) days after the Court issues this

8
9

order.
The current deadlines for Uber to respond to the Manning complaint is vacated.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Uber shall have twenty-eight (28) days to respond to the Consolidated Complaint after it is

12

filed, Plaintiffs shall have twenty-one (21) days to file an opposition to Uber’s responsive motion,

13

and Uber shall have fourteen (14) days to file its reply in support of its responsive motion.

14
15
16

The Initial Case Management currently set in the Manning action shall be continued to
December 11, 2018 at 2:00pm.
Kaufman PA, Woodrow & Peluso LLC, and Girard Gibbs LLP shall serve as interim lead

17

Plaintiffs’ counsel in the Consolidated Actions. Counsel of record from any of these three firms

18

will have authority to represent the Plaintiffs in the Consolidated Actions.

19

The Clerk is directed to e-file this order in Michael Fridman, et al. v. Uber Technologies,

20

Inc., et al., Case No. 18-cv-02815-HSG. The parties shall coordinate on any discovery that

21

overlaps between the Consolidated Actions and the Fridman action to avoid duplicative discovery

22

and to maximize efficiency.

23
24
25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 9/27/2018
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

27
28
2