Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Uber Class Action Complaint

Uber Class Action Complaint

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,786 |Likes:
Published by Leah Rachel Swan
SF class action suit against Uber for tip-skimming and labor violations.
SF class action suit against Uber for tip-skimming and labor violations.

More info:

Published by: Leah Rachel Swan on Aug 28, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/23/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Case4:13-cv-03826-KAW
Documentl
Filed08/16/13
Pagel
of
14
",
Niao,
1
MONIQUE
OLIVIER
(SBN
190385)
F
I
L
E
ID
Z0--/,
molivier@dplolaw.coin)
DUCKWORTH,
PETERS,
LEBOWITZ,
OLIVIER
LLP
CLE
DISTRICT
C
R:UU.G1
6
O13
S.
FT1HCAD7SCTR
VWIEKING
I
C
T.
OF
CAL°IUFORR"
rterA
100
Bush
Street,
Suite
1800
c
San
Francisco,
CA
94104
V
4
Telephone:
(415)
433-0333
N
0
RERN
Facsimile:
(415)
449-6556
5-
SHANNON
LISS-RIORDAN,
pro
hac
»ice
anticipated
(sliss@llrlaw.com)
7
SARA
SMOLIK,
pro
hac
vice
anticipated
8
(ssmolik@llrlaw.corn)
LICHTEN
&
LISS-RIORDAN,
P.C.
9
100
Cambridge
Street,
20th
Floor
Boston,
MA
02114,
0
Telephone:(617)
994-5800
Facsimile:
(617)
994-5801
yi
i
12
UNITED
STATES
DISTRICT
COURT
NORTHERN
DISTRICT
OF
CALIFORNIA
13
(SAN
FRANCISCO
DIVISION)
14
DOUGLASO'CONNOR
and
THOMAS
liNo.
13
3
8
2
6
5
COLOPY,
individually
and
on
behalf
of
all
others
similarly
situated,
16
CLASS
ACTION
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs,
ANDJURY
DEMAND
718
vs'
19
UBER
TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.,
TRAVIS
KALANICK,
and
RYAN
GRAVES,
20
Defendants.
21
22
I.
INTRODUCTION
23
1.
This
case
is
brought
on
behalf
of
individuals
who
have
worked
as
Uberdrivers
24
anywhere
in
the
United
States
(other
than
Massachusetts).
Uberis
a
car
service
that
provides
drivers
who
can
be
hailed
and
dispatched
through
a
mobile
phone
application.
As
set
forth
26
below,
Uber
advertises
to
customers
that
gratuity
is
included
in
the
cost
of
its
car
service.
7
28
CLASS
ACTION
COMPLAINT
AND
JURY
DEMAND
 
Case4:13-cv-03826-KAW
Documentl
Filed08/16/13
Page2
of
14
II
I
However,
Uber
drivers
do
not
receive
the
total
proceeds
of
anysuch
gratuity.
Instead,
they
receive
only
a
portion
of
such
gratuity,
if
any
is
charged
to
the
customer.
Furthermore,
based
on
3
Uber's
communication
to
customers
that
gratuity
is
included
in
the
price
of
its
service
and
so
4
they
do
not
need
to
tip,
few
if
any
customers
leave
tips
for
the
drivers.
Thus,
drivers
do
not
6
receive
the
tips
that
are
customary
in
the
car
service
industry
and
that
they
wouldotherwise
7
receive
were
it
not
for
Uber's
communication
tocustomers
that
they
do
not
need
to
tip.
8
2.
Plaintiffs
bring
this
action
on
their
own
behalf,
and
on
behalf
of
all
Uber
drivers
9
across
the
country
(except
in
Massachusetts),
for
unjustenrichment,
tortious
interference
with
10
contractualand/or
advantageous
relations,
violation
of
the
California
Gratuities
Law,
California
12
Labor
Code
Section
351,
and
the
CaliforniaUnfair
Competition
Law,
Cal.
Bus.
&
Prof.
Code
13
17200
et
seq.
("UCL"),
based
upon
Uber's
failure
to
remit
to
drivers
the
entire
gratuity
paid
by
14
customers,
or
alternatively
for
Uber's
causing
the
drivers
not
to
receive
tipsthey
would
15
otherwise
receive
based
on
Uber'scommunications
to
customers
that
the
gratuity
is
already
6
17
includedin
the
price
of
the
car
service
and
that
thereis
no
need
to
tip
the
drivers.
18
3.
In
addition,
Plaintiffs
bring
this
action
on
behalf
of
Uberdriverswho
havebeen
19
misclassified
as
independent
contractors
and
thereby
required
to
pay
business
expenses
(such
as
20
for
their
vehicles,
gas,
and
maintenance)
in
violation
of
California
Labor
Code
Section
2802.
21
II.
PARTIES
2223
4.
Plaintiff
Douglas
O'Connor
is
an
adultresident
of
South
San
Francisco,
California,
24
where
he
works
as
an
Uberdriver.
25
5•
Plaintiff
Thomas
Colopy
is
an
adultresident
of
San
Francisco,
California,
where
he
26
works
as
an
Uber
driver.
27
2
28
CLASS
ACTION
COMPLAINT
ANDJURY
DEMAND
 
Case4:13-cv-03826-KAW
Documentl
Filed08/16/13
Page3
of
14
II
1
6.
Plaintiffs
bring
thisaction
on
their
own
behalf
and
on
behalf
of
all
others
similarly
2
situated,namely
all
other
individuals
who
have
worked
as
Uber
drivers
anywhere
in
the
country
other
than
in
Massachusetts.
4
7.
Defendant
Uber
Technologies,
Inc.
("Ilber")
is
a
corporation
headquartered
in
San
6
Francisco,
California.
7
8.
Defendant
Travis
Kalanick
at
allrelevanttimes
has
been
an
individual
resident
of
8
California
and
the
President
and
a
Director
of
Uber.
Mr,
Kalanick
is
responsible
for
the
pay
9
practices
and
employmentpolicies
of
Uber
throughout
the
country.
0
11
9.
Defendant
Ryan
Graves
at
allrelevanttimes
has
been
an
individual
resident
of
12
California
and
the
Vice
President
and
a
Director
of
Uber,
Mr.
Graves
is
responsible
for
the
pay
13
practices
and
employment
policies
of
Uber
throughout
the
country.
14
III.
JURISDICTION
15
10.
This
Court
has
jurisdiction
over
the
state
law
claims
asserted
here
pursuant
to
the
16
17
Class
Action
Fairness
Act,
28
U.S.C.
1332(d)(2),
since
Defendants
are
California
citizens
and
18
members
of
the
plaintiff
class
reside
in
states
aroundthe
country;
there
are
more
than
100
19
putative
class
members;
andthe
amount
in
controversy
exceeds
$5
million.
20
IV.
STATEMENT
OF
FACTS
21
11.
Uber
provides
car
service
in
cities
throughout
the
country
via
an
on
demand
dispatch
?
system.
23
24
12.
Uberoffers
customers
the
ability
to
hail
a
car
service
driver
on
a
mobile
phone
25
application.
26
13.
Uber's
website
advertises
that
"Uber
is
your
on-demand
private
driver."
27
3
28
CLASS
ACTION
COMPLAINT
AND
JURY
DEMAND

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->