Uber OConnor Mediate
Transcript of Uber OConnor Mediate
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV 13-03826-EMCJOINT SUBMISSION PURSUANT TO
DECEMBER 6, 2013 ORDER (DKT. NO. 60)
SHANNON LISS-RIORDAN, pro hac viceSARA SMOLIK, pro hac viceLICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.100 Cambridge Street, 20th Floor Boston, MA 02114Tel: 617.994.5800Fax: [email protected]@llrlaw.com
Attorneys for PlaintiffsDOUGLAS O’CONNOR andTHOMAS COLOPY
ROBERT JON HENDRICKS, State Bar No. 179751STEPHEN L. TAEUSCH, State Bar No. 247708MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLPOne Market Street, Spear Street Tower San Francisco, California 94105-1126Tel: 415.442.1000Fax: [email protected]@morganlewis.com
Attorneys for DefendantsUBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
DOUGLAS O’CONNOR and THOMASCOLOPY, individually and on behalf of allothers similarly situated;
Plaintiffs,
vs.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., TRAVISKALANICK, and RYAN GRAVES,
Defendants.
Case No. CV 13-03826-EMC
JOINT SUBMISSION RE COURT’SDECEMBER 6TH ORDER (DKT. NO. 60)
Case3:13-cv-03826-EMC Document65 Filed12/20/13 Page1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV 13-03826-EMC1 JOINT SUBMISSION PURSUANT TO
DECEMBER 6, 2013 ORDER (DKT. NO. 60)
DB2/ 24585652.1
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2013, this Court issued an order granting in part Plaintiffs’
Renewed Emergency Motion for Protective Order to Strike Arbitration Clauses (the “Order”)
(Dkt. No. 60), in which it ordered the parties to meet and confer with respect to a proposed
corrective notice;
WHEREAS, the parties have begun to discuss the possibility of participating in early
private mediation of this matter and believe that issuing notice at this point would be disruptive
to the parties’ efforts to explore early resolution;
WHEREAS, the parties are in the process of discussing mediators and dates for potential
early mediation to be completed by mid-March 2014, if not sooner; and
WHEREAS, if in fact early resolution is possible, corrective notice at this time could
create confusion among the putative class members.
WHEREAS, under the foregoing circumstances, the parties do agree that the Court
should defer the issuance of any notice at this time.
The parties hereby request that the Court: (1) defer the issuance of any notice at this time,
and (2) order the parties to submit a joint report re the status of mediation on or before March 31,
2014.
Dated: December 20, 2013 LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
By: /s/ Shannon Liss-RiordanShannon Liss-RiordanAttorneys for Plaintiff DOUGLAS O’CONNOR
Dated: December 20, 2013 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
By: /s/ Robert Jon HendricksRobert Jon HendricksAttorneys for DefendantUBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Case3:13-cv-03826-EMC Document65 Filed12/20/13 Page2 of 2