Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01257/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01257-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)

---

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

3574086 STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER

IRELL & MANELLA LLP

Andra Barmash Greene (123931)

agreene@irell.com

A. Matthew Ashley (198235)

mashley@irell.com

840 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400

Newport Beach, California 92660-6324

Telephone: (949) 760-0991

Facsimile: (949) 760-5200

Attorneys for Defendants

Uber Technologies, Inc.; Rasier, LLC; and

Rasier-CA, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc. dba Yellow Cab 

Co.; Administrative Services SD, LLC dba 

Yellow Radio Service; All Yellow Taxi, Inc. 

dba Metro Cab; American Cab, LLC; 

American Cab, LLC dba Pomona Valley 

Yellow Cab; Bell Cab Company, Inc.; TMMTM, Inc.; Big Dog City Corporation dba 

Citywide Dispatch, Citywide Taxi, and Big 

Dog Cab; Cabco Yellow, Inc. dba California 

Yellow Cab; C&J Leasing, Inc. dba Royal 

Taxi; G&S Transit Management, Inc.; Gorgee 

Enterprises, Inc.; LA City Cab, LLC; Long 

Beach Yellow Cab Co-operative, Inc.; 

Network Paratransit Systems, Inc.; South Bay 

Co-operative, Inc. dba United Checker Cab; 

Taxi Leasing, Inc. dba Yellow Cab of Ventura 

County; Tri-City Transportation Systems, Inc.; 

Tri Counties Transit Corporation dba Blue 

Dolphin Cab of Santa Barbara, Yellow Cab of 

Santa Maria, and Yellow Cab of San Luis 

Obispo; and Yellow Cab of South Bay Cooperative, Inc. dba South Bay Yellow Cab,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Uber Technologies, Inc.; Rasier, LLC; and

Rasier-CA, LLC,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 3:15-cv-01257-JST

STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER

Case 3:15-cv-01257-JST Document 62 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 5
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

3574086

- 2 -

STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER

Plaintiffs L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc. dba Yellow Cab Co.; Administrative Services SD, 

LLC dba Yellow Radio Service; All Yellow Taxi, Inc. dba Metro Cab; American Cab, LLC; 

American Cab, LLC dba Pomona Valley Yellow Cab; Bell Cab Company, Inc.; TM-MTM, Inc.; 

Big Dog City Corporation dba Citywide Dispatch, Citywide Taxi, and Big Dog Cab; Cabco 

Yellow, Inc. dba California Yellow Cab; C&J Leasing, Inc. dba Royal Taxi; G&S Transit 

Management, Inc.; Gorgee Enterprises, Inc.; LA City Cab, LLC; Long Beach Yellow Cab Cooperative, Inc.; Network Paratransit Systems, Inc.; South Bay Co-operative, Inc. dba United 

Checker Cab; Taxi Leasing, Inc. dba Yellow Cab of Ventura County; Tri-City Transportation 

Systems, Inc.; Tri Counties Transit Corporation dba Blue Dolphin Cab of Santa Barbara, Yellow 

Cab of Santa Maria, and Yellow Cab of San Luis Obispo; and Yellow Cab of South Bay Cooperative, Inc. dba South Bay Yellow Cab (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Uber 

Technologies, Inc., Rasier, LLC, and Rasier-CA, LLC (“Defendants”), by and through their 

undersigned counsel, hereby jointly request, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12 and Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), for an order allowing Defendants to amend their answer to remove their 

third, sixth, seventh, eighth, tenth, and eleventh affirmative defenses. The parties stipulate as 

follows: 

WHEREAS, on August 3, 2015, Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint against 

Defendants (Dkt. 50). 

WHEREAS, on August 24, 2015, Defendants filed their Answer to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Complaint (Dkt. 52).

WHEREAS, on September 8, 2015 Plaintiffs wrote a letter to Defendants regarding certain 

alleged deficiencies in Defendants’ Answer that, according to Plaintiffs, would be the appropriate 

subject of a motion to strike under Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

WHEREAS, on September 9, 2015 the parties filed a joint stipulation to extend Plaintiffs’ 

deadline to move strike Defendants’ Answer so that the parties could meet and confer regarding 

Plaintiffs’ letter (Dkt. 59). 

WHEREAS, on September 14, 2015 the Court granted this stipulation (Dkt. 60). 

WHEREAS, the parties have now met and conferred and have agreed that Plaintiffs will 

Case 3:15-cv-01257-JST Document 62 Filed 09/29/15 Page 2 of 5
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

3574086

- 3 -

STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER

not file a motion to strike provided that Defendants amend their Answer to remove the following 

affirmative defenses: Affirmative Defense #3 (“Laches”), Affirmative Defense #6 (“Estoppel”), 

Affirmative Defense #7 (“Unclean Hands”), Affirmative Defense #8 (“Waiver”), Affirmative 

Defense #10 (“Collateral Estoppel and Res Judicata”), and Affirmative Defense #11 (“Failure to 

Mitigate”).

WHEREAS, Defendants’ agreement to remove these defenses shall not in any way be 

construed as an admission that they are improperly plead. 

WHEREAS, Defendants reserve all rights to raise these defenses in a subsequent motion or 

pleading. 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs agree that the absence of these defenses in Defendants’ First 

Amended Answer does not by itself constitute waiver with respect to these defenses. 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs also agree that the absence of these defenses in Defendants’ First 

Amended Answer does not by itself signify that Plaintiffs would be prejudiced should Defendants 

raise these defenses in a future motion or pleading. 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs otherwise reserve all rights to object to any affirmative defense that 

Defendants raise in a future motion or pleading, including, but not limited to, on the grounds of 

prejudice. 

 WHEREAS, the current deadline to amend the pleadings is October 16, 2015 (Dkt 49). 

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, by and through their respective attorneys, stipulate and 

agree that Defendants may amend their Answer to remove their third, sixth, seventh, eighth, tenth, 

and eleventh affirmative defenses. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED 

Case 3:15-cv-01257-JST Document 62 Filed 09/29/15 Page 3 of 5
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

3574086

- 4 -

STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER

Dated: September 28, 2015 By: /s/ A. Matthew Ashley 

ANDRA BARMASH GREENE (Bar. No. 23931) 

 agreene@irell.com 

A. MATTHEW ASHLEY (Bar. No. 198235) 

 mashley@irell.com 

IRELL & MANELLA LLP 

840 Newport Center Drive, Suite 400 

Newport Beach, California 92660-6324 

Telephone: (949) 760-0991 

Facsimile: (949) 760-5200 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Dated: September 28, 2015 By: /s/ Benjamin E. Shiftan 

BRUCE L. SIMON (Bar No. 96241) 

 bsimon@pswlaw.com 

BENJAMIN E. SHIFTAN (Bar No. 265767) 

 bshiftan@pswlaw.com 

PEARSON, SIMON & WARSHAW, LLP 

44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2450 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: (415) 433-9000 

Facsimile: (415) 433-9008 

CHRISTOPHER B. DOLAN (Bar No. 165358) 

 chris@cbdlaw.com 

THE DOLAN LAW FIRM 

1438 Market Street 

San Francisco, California 94102 

Telephone: (415) 421-2800 

Facsimile: (415) 421-2830 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 29, 2015 

The Honorable Jon S. Tigar 

 United States District Judge 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

APPROVED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar 

Case 3:15-cv-01257-JST Document 62 Filed 09/29/15 Page 4 of 5
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

3574086

- 5 -

STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER

ECF ATTESTATION 

 I, Michael D. Harbour, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this 

STIPULATION TO AMEND ANSWER. I hereby attest that I received authorization to insert the 

signatures indicated by a conformed signature (/s/) within this efiled document. 

By: /s/ Michael D. Harbour 

Michael D. Harbour 

Case 3:15-cv-01257-JST Document 62 Filed 09/29/15 Page 5 of 5