Means

Means v. Lyft, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 13, 20243:24-cv-00177California6,211 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 TABATHA MEANS, Case No. 24-cv-00177-MMC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART LYFT'S MOTION

TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED

LYFT, INC., COMPLAINT Defendant. Re: Dkt. No.

12 Before the Court is defendant Lyft, Inc.’s (“Lyft”) “Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint,” filed April 5, 2024, pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6) and 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On May 10, 2024, plaintiff Tabitha Means (“Means”) filed opposition, to which Lyft, on May 24, 2024, replied. Having read and considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motion, the Court rules as follows.1 BACKGROUND Means, a resident of Florida, alleges that on April 28, 2019, she was sexually assaulted by her Lyft driver. (See First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) ¶¶ 9, 134–143, Doc. No. 22.) Specifically, she alleges that while she was…

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.