Todd Johnston v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 15, 20193:16-cv-03134California1,110 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TODD JOHNSTON, Case No. 16-cv-03134-EMC

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

9 v. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

10 UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Docket No. 121 11 Defendant.

12 13 14 On September 16, 2019, this Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Compel Individual 15 Arbitration. See Docket No. 120 (“Order”). On September 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Motion for 16 Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration. See Docket No. 121 (“Mot.”). 17 I. DISCUSSION 18 A. Legal Standard 19 Under Civil Local Rule 7-9, a party must seek leave of the court to file a motion for 20 reconsideration. Civ. L.R. 7-9(a). To prevail, a party “must specifically show reasonable 21 diligence in bringing the motion” and establish one of the following:

22 (1) That at the time of the motion for leave, a material difference in fact or law exists from that which was presented to the Court before 23 entry of…

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.