Tag Archives: 15 Civ. 09796

Judge Rakoff Stays Antitrust Action Against Uber Pending Appeal Over Arbitrability

As part of the ongoing Uber antitrust litigation, Judge Rakoff granted today the defendants’ request to stay the proceeding pending an interlocutory appeal of his prior order denying defendants’ motion to compel arbitration (see our coverage here). Judge Rakoff noted that the while the defendants had not made a “strong showing” that they would succeed on the … Continue Reading

Judge Rakoff Rules That Uber’s Customer Arbitration Clause Is Not Conspicuous Enough to Be Enforceable

In an opinion today, Judge Rakoff denied a motion to compel arbitration of antitrust claims against Uber’s CEO because he found that the arbitration clause was too concealed for the plaintiff to have reasonably agreed to it.  (See our prior posts on the case here.) When a user enters his or her credit card information, … Continue Reading

Judge Rakoff Orders Uber Investigative Firm to Stop “Arguably Criminal Conduct,” Uber Will Pay Plaintiff’s Fees

In the latest chapter of the saga over Uber’s background investigations into an antitrust plaintiff and his counsel (see coverage here), Judge Rakoff has ordered Uber and its investigative firm, Ergo, to cease their background investigations and has enjoined Uber from using any information found during the investigation in the antitrust proceeding.  Uber had hired Ergo to … Continue Reading

On Heels of Inquiry Into Potential Litigation Misconduct, Uber CEO Moves to Have Case Heard in Arbitration

Yesterday — just hours after Judge Rakoff ordered broad discovery from Uber and its in-house counsel regarding potentially improper investigative techniques —  Uber’s CEO moved to compel arbitration in the antitrust class action brought by Uber riders (see previous coverage here).  The motion argues that the CEO, as an employee of Uber, is entitled to assert Uber’s arbitration clause … Continue Reading

Judge Rakoff Authorizes Discovery from Uber Counsel to Probe Potentially Improper Investigation of Adversary and Opposing Counsel

A memorandum order released today reveals that, in an antitrust case against Uber’s CEO (covered here), Judge Rakoff became concerned over improper investigative techniques that Uber (or its agents) employed.  Specifically, Uber hired an firm called Ergo to investigate the plaintiff and plaintiff’s counsel, and, in doing so, Ergo’s investigator allegedly made various misrepresentations to … Continue Reading
LexBlog