O'Connor
O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Chen, J.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Douglas O’Connor, Thomas Colopy, Matthew Manahan, and Elie Gur-finkel are current or former drivers who have performed services for Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc. Docket No. 330 (Second Amended Complaint) (SAC) at ¶¶ 4-10. They are prosecuting the instant *1098 class action against Uber, alleging that Uber has violated California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) by violating Section 351 of the Labor Code. On September 1, 2015, the Court certified a class action on behalf of the following individuals.
Docket No. 276 (Certification Order) at 67.
Uber now moves to compel arbitration as to absent class members who are subject to the 2013 Agreements to arbitrate their disputes with Uber. 1 Docket No. 346 (Mot.) at 1. Uber’s motion to compel arbitration came on for hearing before the Court on November 4, 2015. For the reasons- set forth in the Court’s order denying arbitration in Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. C-14-5200-EMC, 109 F.Supp.3d 1185 , 2015 WL 3749716 (N.D.Cal. June 9, 2015), as supplemented below, the Court DENIES Uber’s motion to compel arbitration under the 2013 Agreements.…