Ehret

Ehret v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Good Law
148 F. Supp. 3d 884·2015 WL 7759464·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161803
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 2, 2015Case No. 14-cv-00113-EMCCalifornia9,733 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

Docket No.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Caren Ehret filed the instant putative class action against Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc., alleging that Defendant violated the California Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). Docket No. 40 (First Amended Complaint) (FAC). Plaintiff contends that Uber made misrepresentations when it informed consumers that it would automatically charge a 20% “gratuity” when taxi rides were arranged through its app when in fact, Uber kept a substantial portion of the purported “gratuity” for itself. Id. at ¶¶ 11, 13.

Plaintiffs motion for class certification came on for hearing before the Court on October 8, 2015. In her motion, Plaintiff proposed to certify the following class: “Ml individuals who arranged and paid for taxi rides through Uber’s service from April 18, 2012 to March 25, 2013.” Docket No. 101 at 3 (Mot.). For the reasons explained before, the Court will certify the following class: “Ml individuals who received Uber’s e-mail with the representation' that the 20% charge would be gratuity only, who then arranged and paid…

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.