In re Uber Techs. Passenger Sexual Assault Litig.

Full title: IN RE: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., PASSENGER SEXUAL ASSAULT LITIGATION This…

Court: United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jan 24, 2024

23-md-03084-CRB (N.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2024)

Opinion

23-md-03084-CRB

01-24-2024

IN RE: UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., PASSENGER SEXUAL ASSAULT LITIGATION This Document Relates to: ALL CASES

HON. LISA J. CISNEROS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE COURT JUDGE

[PROPOSED] ORDER AS MODIFIED RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTY'S MATERIAL SHOULD BE SEALED

HON. LISA J. CISNEROS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE COURT JUDGE

Having considered Plaintiffs' January 8, 2024 Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another Party's Material Should Be Filed Under Seal, related to Exhibit A to the Supplemental Declaration of Roopal P. Luhana in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Enforce PTO No. 2 and to compel Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc., Rasier, LLC, and Rasier-CA, LLC (collectively “Uber”) to produce litigation hold and preservation information, and having considered Uber's Statement of Non-Opposition, ECF No. 218, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion and ORDERS that the following materials shall not be sealed, and within seven days Plaintiff shall file an unsealed version of Exhibit A, ECF No. 184-1:

Document	Description	Designating Party
Exhibit A to the Supplemental Declaration of Roopal P. Luhana in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Enforce PTO No. 2 and to Compel Defendants to Produce Litigation Hold and Preservation Information	List of the job titles of past and current Uber employees subject to a legal hold	Uber

IT IS SO ORDERED.