Cases

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL R. RATTAGAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant and Respondent. S272113 Ninth Circuit 20-16796 Northern District of California 3:19-CV-01988-EMC August 22, 2024 Justice

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAUREL HILBERT, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 24-00584 (AHA) v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants. Memorandum Opinion Plaintiff Laurel Hilbert brought this action against Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc., and two subsi

Filed 6/24/24 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO JANE DOE WHBE 3, et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, A167458, A167709 v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et (San Francisco City & County al., Super. Ct. No. CJC21005188)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JESUS M. CHRISTIAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 24-00304 (EGS) UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Jesus M. Christian (“Mr. Christan”), in his individual capacity and as the personal representative of the es

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA ERIK ADOLPH, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant and Appellant. S274671 Fourth Appellate District, Division Three G059860 and G060198 Orange County Superior Court 30-2019-01103801 July 17,

Filed 3/24/23 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR JOHNATHON GREGG, B302925 Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC719085 v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants and Appellants. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los An

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 2, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D23-0802 Lower Tribunal No. 19-31984 ________________ Yesit Campo, etc., et al., Appellants,

J-A03009-22 2022 PA Super 172 SHANNON CHILUTTI AND KEITH IN THE SUPERIOR COURT CHILUTTI, H/W OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellants v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., GEGEN, LLC, RAISER-PA, LLC, RAISER, LLC, SARAH’S CAR CARE, INC. AND MOHAMMED BASHIER Appellees No. 1023 EDA 2021 Appeal from the Order Entered

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 20-1386 JOHN CAPRIOLE, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; DARA KHOSROWSHAHI, Defendants, Appellees. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUS

J-A03009-22 2022 PA Super 172 SHANNON CHILUTTI AND KEITH : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CHILUTTI, H/W : PENNSYLVANIA : Appellants : : : v. :

J-E01003-23 2023 PA Super 126 SHANNON CHILUTTI AND KEITH IN THE SUPERIOR COURT CHILUTTI, H/W OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellants v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., GEGEN, LLC, RAISER-PA, LLC, RAISER, LLC, SARAH’S CAR CARE, INC. AND MOHAMMED BASHIER Appellees No. 1023 EDA 2021 Appeal from the Order Entere

J-E01003-23 2023 PA Super 126 SHANNON CHILUTTI AND KEITH : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CHILUTTI, H/W : PENNSYLVANIA : Appellants : : : v. :

Filed 10/22/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A160701, A160706 v. (City & County of San Francisco UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Super. Ct. No. CGC-20-584402) Defendants and Appella

Filed 11/20/20 (unmodified opinion attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR THE PEOPLE, A160701, A160706 Plaintiff and Respondent, (City & County of San Francisco v.

MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions Decision: 2022 ME 8 Docket: Cum-21-117 Argued: October 6, 2021 Decided: January 27, 2022 Panel: STANFILL, C.J., and MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HUMPHREY, HORTON, and CONNORS, JJ. PATRICIA SARCHI, et al. v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al. HORTON, J. [¶1] Uber Tech

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MICHAEL R. RATTAGAN, No. 20-16796 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:19-CV-01988-EMC UBER TECHNOLOGIES, ORDER CERTIFYING INC., QUESTION TO THE Defendant-Appellee. SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA Filed December 6, 2021 Before: Mar

ORDER ON PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Mark E. Walker, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION You live in Gainesville and need to book a party bus, or perhaps a non-party bus or a limo to take a number of people to an event. You run a Google search for “Gainesville party bus” and, not satisfied with any of the offerings on page one of the results, turn to page two. There is a listing

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEPHAN NAMISNAK; FRANCIS No. 18-15860 FALLS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. 3:17-cv-06124- v. RS UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; RASIER, LLC, OPINION Defendants-Appellants.

Filed 1/29/18 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE LEONID GONCHAROV et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, A149347 v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., (San Francisco City & County Supe

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Compel and Stay; Denying as Moot Motion to Certify Class Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, United States District Court Judge Plaintiffs bring this putative class action complaint against defendants Uber Technologies, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries (collectively, “Uber”) for alleged breaches of contract related to the charging of certain fees. (Dkt.