Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-02499/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-02499-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1330 Breach of Contract

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHUCK CONGDON, ET AL., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 16-cv-02499-YGR 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY

Dkt. No. 22 

On July 19, 2016, defendants filed a Motion to Stay the above-captioned action pending 

the Ninth Circuit’s decisions in Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., No. 15-16178 (9th 

Cir., filed June 11, 2015) and O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 15-17420 (9th Cir., 

filed Dec. 9, 2015). In light of the Ninth Circuit’s recent opinion in Mohamed issued on 

September 7, 2016, the Court DENIES defendants’ Motion.1

The parties shall file a JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT in advance of the Case 

Management Conference currently set for Monday, September 12, 2016, and no later than 9:00 

a.m. on that day.2 The joint statement must include all elements requested in the “Standing Order 

for All Judges of the Northern District of California—Contents of Joint Case Management 

Statement,” as well as the parties’ perspectives on the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Mohamed. 

This Order terminates Docket Number 22. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 7, 2016 ______________________________________ 

 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

 1

 The Court VACATES the hearing currently set on this Motion for September 13, 2016. 

2

 The parties are reminded that pursuant to the Court’s Standing Order, a joint case 

management statement must be filed “seven days in advance of the initial case management 

conference date.” Standing Order in Civil Cases ¶ 6. Failure to comply with the Local Rules or 

the Court’s Standing Orders in the future may result in sanctions. 

Case 4:16-cv-02499-YGR Document 42 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 1