James
James v. Uber Technologies Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CHRISTOPHER JAMES, et al., Case No. 19-cv-06462-EMC
Plaintiffs,
ORDER DENYING MENDEL’S
v. MOTION TO DISQUALIFY OR
RECUSE
UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC., Docket No. 235 Defendant.
12 13 I. INTRODUCTION Mr. Mendel moves to disqualify or recuse the Court under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) for “judicial prejudicial bias.” Docket No. 235. For the reasons provided below, Mr. Mendel’s motion is procedurally improper and substantively meritless. The motion is DENIED. II. BACKGROUND The underlying class action arose out of allegations that certain Uber and Uber Eats drivers were misclassified as independent contractors under California law. Plaintiffs brought various wage and sick leave claims under the California Labor Code. See generally Docket No. 81 (Amended Complaint). Mr. Mendel, as a former driver for Uber, was a member of the class. Docket No. 221 (July 8, 2022 Order) at 2. At no…