Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-02931/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-02931-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 47:227 Telephone Consumer Protection 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUCIUS MANNING,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-02931-HSG 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

CONSOLIDATE

Re: Dkt. No. 39

CARLA VARIO,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-03829-HSG 

Re: Dkt. No. 33

SHELTON BOLLINGER,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-04538-HSG 

Re: Dkt. No. 19

GOOD CAUSE appearing, the cases captioned Lucius Manning v. Uber Technologies, 

Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv-02931-HSG; Carla Vario v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv03829-HSG; and Shelton Bollinger v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv-04538-HSG, are

hereby consolidated for all pretrial and trial proceedings. The earliest-filed civil action, Case No. 

Case 4:18-cv-02931-HSG Document 43 Filed 09/27/18 Page 1 of 2
2

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 California

4:18-cv-02931-HSG, shall serve as the lead case. The clerk is directed to administratively close 

the later-filed civil actions, Case Nos. 4:18-cv-03829-HSG and 4:18-cv-04538-HSG. All future 

filings should be done in the lead case (Case No. 4:18-cv-02931-HSG) only and should be 

captioned “In Re Uber Text Messaging.”

This order of consolidation also applies to any other cases that are subsequently filed in, 

removed to, or transferred to this Court involving the same or substantially similar issues of law 

and fact as In Re Uber Text Messaging.

A Consolidated Complaint shall be filed within seven (7) days after the Court issues this

order.

The current deadlines for Uber to respond to the Manning complaint is vacated.

Uber shall have twenty-eight (28) days to respond to the Consolidated Complaint after it is 

filed, Plaintiffs shall have twenty-one (21) days to file an opposition to Uber’s responsive motion, 

and Uber shall have fourteen (14) days to file its reply in support of its responsive motion.

The Initial Case Management currently set in the Manning action shall be continued to 

December 11, 2018 at 2:00pm.

Kaufman PA, Woodrow & Peluso LLC, and Girard Gibbs LLP shall serve as interim lead 

Plaintiffs’ counsel in the Consolidated Actions. Counsel of record from any of these three firms 

will have authority to represent the Plaintiffs in the Consolidated Actions.

The Clerk is directed to e-file this order in Michael Fridman, et al. v. Uber Technologies, 

Inc., et al., Case No. 18-cv-02815-HSG. The parties shall coordinate on any discovery that 

overlaps between the Consolidated Actions and the Fridman action to avoid duplicative discovery 

and to maximize efficiency.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

9/27/2018

Case 4:18-cv-02931-HSG Document 43 Filed 09/27/18 Page 2 of 2