Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00697/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00697-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Susan Bannon
Plaintiff
Dominic Cobarruviaz
Plaintiff
Arlin Golden
Plaintiff
Instacart
Defendant
Maplebear, Inc.
Defendant
John Reilly
Plaintiff
Christopher Russell
Plaintiff
Batya Weber
Plaintiff
Derek Williams
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

30

31

32

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:15-cv-00697-EMC

953472

Robert S. Arns (# 65071)

rsa@arnslaw.com

Jonathan E. Davis (# 191346)

jed@arnslaw.com 

Kevin M. Osborne (# 261367)

kmo@arnslaw.com

Julie C. Erickson (# 293111)

jce@arnslaw.com

THE ARNS LAW FIRM

A Professional Corporation

515 Folsom Street, 3rd Floor

San Francisco, California 94105

Tel: (415) 495-7800 / Fax: (415) 495-7888

Jahan C. Sagafi, State Bar No. 224887 

jsagafi@outtengolden.com

OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP

One Embarcadero Center, 38th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Tel: (415) 638-8800 / Fax: (415) 638-8810

Michael J. Scimone (pro hac vice) 

mscimone@outtengolden.com

3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor

New York, New York 10016

Tel: (212) 245-1000 - Fax: (646) 509-2060 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

KEKER & VAN NEST LLP

RACHAEL E. MENY - #178514

rmeny@kvn.com

BENJAMIN BERKOWITZ - #244441

bberkowitz@kvn.com

NIKKI K. VO - #239543

nvo@kvn.com

RYAN K. WONG - #267189

rwong@kvn.com

633 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1809

Telephone: 415-391-5400 

Facsimile: 415-397-7188

Attorneys for Defendant 

MAPLEBEAR, INC. dba INSTACART

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOMINIC COBARRUVIAZ, ARLIN 

GOLDEN, JOHN REILLY, 

CHRISTOPHER RUSSELL, SUSAN 

BANNON, BATYA WEBER, AND 

DEREK WILLIAMS, Individually, and On 

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated 

Employees,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MAPLEBEAR, INC., dba INSTACART and 

DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:15-cv-00697-EMC

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING SCOPE OF NEW 

EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT AND 

ARBITRATION AGREEMENT AND 

TOLLING

Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen

Case 3:15-cv-00697-EMC Document 55 Filed 07/22/15 Page 1 of 4
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

30

31

32

1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:15-cv-00697-EMC

WHEREAS, Defendant Maplebear, Inc. dba Instacart (“Instacart”) seeks to enforce 

arbitration provisions in an Independent Contractor Agreement (“IC Agreement”) between certain 

individuals and Instacart, as detailed in Instacart’s pending Motion to Compel Individual 

Arbitration (Dkt. No. 29);

WHEREAS, Instacart recently offered a position of employment with Instacart (“the 

Employment Contract”) (attached hereto as Exhibit A) to certain members of Plaintiffs’ proposed 

class;

WHEREAS, the Employment Contract includes an arbitration agreement (“Employment 

Arbitration Agreement”) with terms that are different from those in the operative version of the 

arbitration agreement at issue in Instacart’s currently pending Motion to Compel Arbitration (Dkt. 

No. 29);

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ counsel are concerned that proposed class members may construe 

the Employment Contract as resolving, undermining, or otherwise affecting their claims in this 

litigation;

WHEREAS, Instacart’s position is that the Employment Contract and Employment 

Arbitration Agreement do not affect the pending Motion to Compel Individual Arbitration, do not 

apply to any IC Agreement, and do not affect the rights of putative class members to participate 

in this pending litigation related to relationships allegedly created under the IC Agreement; and

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to avoid any motion practice in this litigation regarding the 

effect of the Employment Contract and the Employment Arbitration Agreement on the Instacart’s 

pending Motion to Compel Individual Arbitration, and also to avoid any motion practice 

regarding any assertion by Plaintiffs regarding whether a “corrective notice” should be issued 

relating to the Employment Contract or Employment Arbitration Agreement, an assertion that is 

disputed by Instacart.

NOW THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree as follows:

1. The Employment Contract, including the Employment Arbitration Agreement therein, 

applies only to employment relationships created with Instacart from the time of 

execution forward, and does not apply retroactively to any relationship created under a 

Case 3:15-cv-00697-EMC Document 55 Filed 07/22/15 Page 2 of 4
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

30

31

32

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:15-cv-00697-EMC

previously existing IC Agreement.

2. Nothing in the Employment Contract (including the Employment Arbitration 

Agreement therein) affects the ability of putative class members to participate in this 

litigation related to relationships allegedly created under a previously existing IC 

Agreement.

3. The statutes of limitations for Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) claims asserted by 

Plaintiffs in their “[PROPOSED] COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT [29 U.S.C. 

§§ 201] AND FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT,” dated April 8, 

2015, to the extent they are still currently running, are hereby tolled from June 23, 

2015 until fourteen days after a decision on Defendant’s Motion to Compel 

Arbitration (Dkt No. 29) and Motion to Dismiss (Dkt No. 27).

Dated: July 21, 2015

By:

KEKER & VAN NEST LLP

/s/ Rachael E. Meny

RACHAEL E. MENY

BENJAMIN BERKOWITZ

NIKKI K. VO

RYAN K. WONG

Attorneys for Defendant

MAPLEBEAR, INC. dba INSTACART

Dated: July 21, 2015

By:

THE ARNS LAW FIRM

/s/ Robert S. Arns

ROBERT S. ARNS

JONATHAN E. DAVIS

KEVIN M. OSBORNE

JULIE C. ERICKSON 

OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP

JAHAN C. SAGAFI

MICHAEL J. SCIMONE (pro hac vice)

Case 3:15-cv-00697-EMC Document 55 Filed 07/22/15 Page 3 of 4
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

30

31

32

3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case No. 3:15-cv-00697-EMC

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DOMINIC COBARRUVIAZ, ARLIN 

GOLDEN, JOHN REILLY, 

CHRISTOPHER RUSSELL, SUSAN 

BANNON, BATYA WEBER, AND 

DEREK WILLIAMS, Individually, and On 

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated 

Employees

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _______________________ ________________________________________

Honorable District Judge Edward M. Chen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7/22/15

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:15-cv-00697-EMC Document 55 Filed 07/22/15 Page 4 of 4