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 3:16-cv-07343-LB

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THIS

ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF MORRIS V. ERNST & YOUNG, LLP,

CASE NO. 16-330 IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

JONATHAN H. BLAVIN (State Bar No. 230269)

jonathan.blavin@mto.com

ANKUR MANDHANIA (State Bar No. 302373)

ankur.mandhania@mto.com

MOLLY K. PRIEDEMAN (State Bar No. 302096)

molly.priedeman@mto.com

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

560 Mission Street

Twenty-Seventh Floor

San Francisco, California 94105-2907

Telephone: (415) 512-4000

Facsimile: (415) 512-4077

Attorneys for LYFT, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

PETE PETERSON, on behalf of himself and 

others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

LYFT, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:16-cv-07343

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER STAYING DISTRICT COURT 

PROCEEDINGS IN THIS ACTION 

PENDING RESOLUTION OF MORRIS V. 

ERNST & YOUNG, LLP, Case No. 16-330

IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT 
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 -1- 3:16-cv-07343-LB

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THIS 

ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF MORRIS V. ERNST & YOUNG, LLP,

CASE NO. 16-330 IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT 

Plaintiff PETE PETERSON, and Defendant LYFT, INC., through their respective 

counsel of record, and without admission of any kind, or waiver of any defense, objection or other 

response, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this action on December 27, 2016;

WHEREAS, Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration and To Dismiss the 

Complaint on March 13, 2017; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on April 3, 2017; 

WHEREAS, the Court found Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and To 

Dismiss the Complaint moot on April 17, 2017;

WHEREAS, Defendant filed Motion to Compel Arbitration and To Dismiss the 

First Amended Complaint on April 17, 2017; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff has indicated in correspondence with Defendant that it 

intends to rely on Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 834 F.3d 975, 979 (9th Cir. 2016), cert. granted, 

137 S. Ct. 809 (2017) (“Morris”), in opposing Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration;

WHEREAS, Defendant disagrees that Morris applies to Plaintiff’s claim in this 

action;

WHEREAS, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Morris,

Case No. 16-300, on January 13, 2017;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that it would be more efficient for the Court and the 

parties to stay all district court proceedings pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s resolution of 

Morris;

WHEREAS, by entering into this stipulation, Defendant in no way waives, and 

reserves all rights with respect to, the argument that Morris does not apply to Plaintiff’s claim in 

the First Amended Complaint; 

WHEREAS, by entering into this stipulation, Plaintiff in no way waives, and 

reserves all rights with respect to any and all additional arguments in opposition to Defendant’s 

Motion to Compel Arbitration; 
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 -2- 3:16-cv-07343-LB

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THIS 

ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF MORRIS V. ERNST & YOUNG, LLP,

CASE NO. 16-330 IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties through their respective 

counsel that, subject to this court’s approval: 

1. All district court proceedings in this case are hereby stayed. 

2. The stay shall be lifted upon the U.S. Supreme Court’s issuance of a decision in 

Morris.

3. The Parties shall meet and confer within fourteen (14) days of the U.S. Supreme 

Court’s issuance of a decision in Morris, and shall file a joint status report 

thereafter. 

DATED: April 27, 2017 REESE LLP

MICHAEL R. REESE

HALUNEN LAW

MELISSA WOLCHANSKY

FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.

JAMES A. FRANCIS

JOHN SOUMILAS

By: /s/ Michael R. Reese

Michael R. Reese

Attorneys for Plaintiff Pete Peterson

DATED: April 27, 2017 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

JONATHAN H. BLAVIN

ANKUR MANDHANIA

MOLLY K. PRIEDEMAN

By: /s/ Jonathan H. Blavin

JONATHAN H. BLAVIN

Attorneys for Defendant LYFT, INC.
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 -3- 3:16-cv-07343-LB

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER STAYING DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS IN THIS 

ACTION PENDING RESOLUTION OF MORRIS V. ERNST & YOUNG, LLP,

CASE NO. 16-330 IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________ ___________________________

Date Hon. Laurel Beeler

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE

April 28, 2017