Recent Order: Third Party Licensed Provider of Livery Services in California has Standing to Sue Uber Technologies for Misclassification

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California recently granted Uber Technologies motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part in a case in a misclassification case.  Plaintiff Diva Limousine (“Diva”), a licensed provider of livery services in California, brings this putative class action on behalf of providers of pre-arranged ground transportation services against Uber Technologies and its subsidiaries (“Uber”). Diva alleges that Uber secures unlawful cost savings by misclassifying its drivers as independent contractors instead of employees. In doing so, Uber takes business and market share from competitors like Diva who operate their businesses in compliance with the law. Diva also alleges that Uber, armed with cash from investors, prices its services below cost in order to drive out competitors. Diva asserts that Uber’s actions violate the California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) and the California Unfair Practices Act (“UPA”).  The Court held that because the complaint on its face does not allege sufficient facts to establish subject matter jurisdiction, Uber’s 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss was GRANTED. Diva was given the right amend its complaint within 30 days of the date of this Order to incorporate the new facts establishing minimal diversity.  The Court also agreed with Uber’s argument that Diva’s UPA claim failed as a matter of law because a statutory provision exempts Uber from Unfair Practices Act liability.  However, the Court denied Uber’s motion to dismiss the Unfair Competition Act claim based on misclassification and allowed the claim to proceed after detailed analysis of Diva’s standing to assert the claim.  Click here​ to read Diva Limousine, Ltd. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. 103621 (N.D. Cal. 2019).