Legal Opinion
In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Wage & Hour Employment Practices
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Decided February 3, 2016No. MDL No. 2686PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Sarah S. Vance, Chair
Before the Panel:* Plaintiffs in one action in the Eastern District of New York (Ogunmokun) move under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize this litigation in the Northern District of California or, alternatively, the Western District of Texas.1 This litigation currently consists of seven actions pending in seven districts, as listed on Schedule A.2 This litigation arises from the allegation that defendants Uber Technologies, Inc,, and its subsidiary Rasier, LLC (collectively, Uber), misclassify Uber transportation providers as independent contractors…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re CVS Caremark Corp. Wage & Hour Employment Practices LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2010
- In re Directv, Inc.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2015
- In re SFPP, L.P., Railroad Property Rights LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2015
3Cited by2 opinions
- Uber Technologies, Inc. v. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2025
- In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Wage & Houremployment Practices Litigation (No. II)United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2017