A.H.M.
A.H.M. v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 A.H.M., Case No. 23-cv-03482-JSC
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
v. MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 24 Defendants.
12 Plaintiff brings this action against Uber Technologies, Inc. and Raiser, LLC (collectively “Uber”) arising out of an assault she suffered from her Uber driver. This is just one of hundreds of similar cases filed in federal court around the country. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) is presently considering whether to consolidate these federal cases before one district court for pretrial purposes. Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to stay proceedings until the JPML issues its decision. (Dkt. Nos. 24; 17.) After carefully considering the briefing, the Court concludes oral argument is not required, see N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), VACATES the October 5, 2023 hearing, and GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to stay. All case …