O'Connor

O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Good Law
58 F. Supp. 3d 989·2014 WL 4382880·24 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 774·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124136
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 4, 2014No. C-13-3826 EMC; Docket No. 116California8,077 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Plaintiffs Douglas O’Connor, Thomas Colopy, David Khan, Matthew Manahan, Wilson Rolle, Jr., and William Anderson (“Plaintiffs”) seek to represent a nationwide class of drivers who provide passenger car service for customers who hail them through Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s mobile phone application. They allege that Uber discourages passengers from tipping by falsely advertising that gratuity is included in the fare, even though the full gratuity is not passed along to the drivers. Plaintiffs allege various California statutory and common law causes of action against Uber, specifically breach of implied-in-fact contract, unfair business practices, and interference with prospective economic advantage. This Court has previously granted-in-part and denied-in-part Uber’s motion to dismiss, and afforded Plaintiffs leave to amend. An amended complaint was filed, and Uber has moved for judgment on the pleading as to most of the claims in the first amended complaint.

Having considered the parties’ briefs and accompanying submissions, as well as the oral argument of counsel, the Court hereby GRANTS Uber’s motion.

I.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.