Congdon

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Compel and Stay; Denying as Moot Motion to Certify Class

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. No. 49, the “FAC.”) Relevant to the instant motion, certain plaintiffs entered into arbitration agreements with Uber. Specifically, plaintiffs Bailey, Congdon, Martinez, Scheink-man, Torres, Webber, Winters, and Zuniga signed agreements and did not opt out of the arbitration provision within said agreements (the “Non-Opt-Out Plaintiffs”).

Now before the Court is defendants’ motion to compel the Non-Opt-Out Plaintiffs into arbitration and to stay the case as to the Opt-Out Plaintiffs pending the completion of the arbitration proceedings. (Dkt. No. 50.) Concurrently, plaintiffs have moved to certify an issues class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(4). Having carefully reviewed the pleadings, the papers submitted, and oral arguments from counsel on December 6, 2016, and for the reasons set forth more fully below, the Court…