From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Philliben v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 3, 2015
3:14-cv-05615-JST (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2015)

Opinion

          IRELL & MANELLA LLP, Andra Barmash Greene, A. Matthew Ashley, Newport Beach, California, Attorneys for Defendants, Uber Technologies, Inc. and Rasier, LLC.

          ARIAS, SANGUINETTI, STAHLE & TORRIJOS, LLP, Mike Arias, Alfredo Torrijos, LIDDLE & DUBIN, P.C., Steven D. Liddle, Nicholas A. Coulson, Attorneys for Plaintiffs.


          JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND TEMPORARY STAY PENDING MEDIATION

          JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.

         Plaintiffs Matthew Philliben and Byron McKnight ("Plaintiffs") and Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc. and Raiser, LLC ("Uber") (collectively with Plaintiffs, the "Parties"), respectfully move this Court to enter a stipulation staying the current litigation for an additional four weeks due to pending settlement negotiations between the Parties and the need for informal discovery. In support of this stipulation, the Parties state:

         WHEREAS, this Court granted the Parties' Joint Stipulation and [Proposed] Order for Temporary Stay Pending Mediation on June 29, 2015 (Dkt. No. 49);

         WHEREAS, the Parties are working to gather and exchange informal discovery prior to their mediation but will be unable to exchange all requested information prior to the previously scheduled August 4, 2015 mediation session with the Hon. Carl J. West (Ret.);

         WHEREAS, the Parties have filed a Stipulation and Protective Order to govern the exchange of information in this case (Dkt. No. 50);

         WHEREAS, the Parties have re-scheduled the mediation session with the Hon. Carl J. West (Ret.) for August 24, 2015 so that the Parties can exchange and review informal discovery prior to the mediation date;

         WHEREAS, the Parties jointly desire to avoid further expenditure of the Court's resources or their own resources on this litigation pending completion of the agreed-upon mediation;

         WHEREAS, no Scheduling Order has been entered for the case;

         WHEREAS, the hearing on Uber's Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration is currently scheduled for August 27, 2015;

         WHEREAS, a Case Management Conference is currently scheduled for September 16, 2015;

         NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS HEREBY

         STIPULATED by and between the Parties that, subject to Court approval, all scheduled deadlines and hearings be continued for 28 days pending mediation between the Parties; the currently scheduled August 27, 2015 hearing on the Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration be continued until at least September 24, 2015; the currently scheduled September 16, 2015 Case Management Conference be continued until at least October 14, 2015; and the parties will file a Joint Statement regarding the status of the settlement following the mediation.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

         PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

         All scheduled deadlines and hearings are continued for 28 days pending mediation between the Parties. The currently scheduled August 27, 2015 hearing on the Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration is continued until September 24, 2015. The currently scheduled September 16, 2015 Case Management Conference is continued until October 14, 2015, and the Parties' deadline to file a Case Management Statement and act under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, including the conference of the Parties pursuant to Rule 26(f) and initial disclosures under Rule 26(a), are extended accordingly and discovery shall remain stayed. The Parties will update the Court on the status of the settlement following the mediation.


Summaries of

Philliben v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 3, 2015
3:14-cv-05615-JST (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2015)
Case details for

Philliben v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW PHILLIBEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 3, 2015

Citations

3:14-cv-05615-JST (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2015)