[Oagdu] NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
David Andrews
dandrews at visi.com
Wed Aug 3 02:12:42 UTC 2016
NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
ATTENTION: ALL BLIND OR VISUALLY DISABLED INDIVIDUALS WHO USE SERVICE
ANIMALS WHEN TRAVELING AND WHO HAVE USED, ATTEMPTED TO USE, OR HAVE BEEN
DETERRED FROM USING TRANSPORTATION SERVICES ARRANGED THROUGH THE UBER RIDER
APP.
THE SETTLEMENT DESCRIBED BELOW MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS.
READ THIS NOTICE AND INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY.
This notice is to inform you about the proposed settlement that would
resolve the class action lawsuit National Federation of the Blind of
California, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-4086 (N.D.
Cal.). The lawsuit alleges that Uber Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiary
and affiliate entities (collectively, “Uber”), violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq., by failing to take the
necessary steps to ensure that transportation providers using the Uber
mobile software application (“Drivers”) do not discriminate against blind or
visually disabled riders who travel with service animals (“Riders”). Uber
denies all liability in the case and asserts that its current practices do
not violate applicable federal, state, and local law. The settlement, which
must be approved by the Court, would resolve the lawsuit.
I. Summary of the Proposed Settlement
Under the settlement, Uber agrees to take additional steps to inform Drivers
of their obligations to transport all Riders. Uber will require that new
and existing Drivers expressly confirm that they understand and agree to
these obligations, through a pop-up interactive questionnaire in the Driver
mobile software application and changes to the technology services
agreement. In addition, Uber will send quarterly email reminders to
Drivers.
Uber will also adopt a new enforcement practice. If, following a complaint
from a Rider, Uber determines that a driver knowingly refused to transport a
Rider because the Rider was traveling with a service animal, Uber will
terminate that Driver’s contract and permanently remove the Driver from the
Driver platform. In addition, if Uber receives plausible complaints on more
than one occasion that a Driver denied service to a Rider because the Rider
was traveling with a service animal, Uber will terminate the Driver’s
contract and the Driver will be permanently removed from the Driver
platform. This second basis for contract termination will apply where Uber
was unable to determine whether the first denial was a knowing violation.
Under the settlement, Uber will also enhance its response system for
complaints that a Driver denied service to a Rider because the Rider was
traveling with a service animal, and will provide greater transparency to
Riders regarding what action has been taken in response to a complaint about
a Driver. Uber will also limit the circumstances in which a Rider can be
charged for cleaning issues related to his or her service animal.
Additionally, Uber will record each allegation that a Driver is alleged to
have denied service to a Rider, or otherwise discriminated against a Rider,
because the Rider was traveling with a service animal, and will report
aggregated data to Class Counsel. The National Federation of the Blind and
its California affiliate will administer a testing program, through which
blind individuals request and take trips to evaluate the effectiveness of
the settlement. A third-party individual will monitor Uber’s compliance
with the settlement as well.
The settlement also provides that the three named individual plaintiffs who
served as class representatives will receive payments of $15,000 each in
return for their release of their individual damage claims. In addition,
the National Federation of the Blind will receive three annual payments of
$75,000 during the term of the settlement, and a fourth payment of $75,000
if the term of the settlement is extended. These payments are intended to
support the Federation’s testing program.
Finally, Disability Rights Advocates, Rosen, Bien, Galvan & Grunfeld LLP,
and TRE Legal Practice (collectively, “Class Counsel”), the attorneys who
represent the class, will have the right to seek attorneys’ fees and costs
for their work on the case. Class Counsel will file a motion asking the
Court to award reasonable fees and costs for work on the merits phase of
this case. The Court must approve the amount awarded even if the parties
reach an agreement on the amount. This motion for fees and costs will be
available on www.nfb-serviceanimal-settlement.com on September 21, 2016.
Class Counsel will also be entitled to seek reasonable fees and costs for
their future work monitoring compliance with the settlement and enforcing
the agreement. Uber retains the right to contest the amount of any
attorneys’ fees requested by Class Counsel.
II. who is in the class?
All blind or visually disabled individuals nationwide who travel with the
assistance of service animals and who have used, attempted to use, or been
deterred from attempting to use transportation arranged through the Uber
rider app.
III. The Effect of the Settlement on the Rights of Class Members
All class members will be bound by the terms of the settlement relating to
access to transportation services arranged using the Uber app for blind or
visually disabled persons who use service animals, if the settlement
agreement is approved by the Court. If the settlement is approved, all class
members will release and forever discharge all claims for injunctive relief
under all federal, state, and local laws related to alleged discrimination
by Uber against blind or visually disabled persons who use service animals
that arose before the Settlement Agreement becomes effective. Class members,
other than the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit, are not releasing any claims
for monetary damages.
IV. Objecting to the Settlement
You can ask the Court to deny approval of this settlement by filing an
objection with the Court. You cannot ask the Court to order a different
settlement; the Court can only approve or deny this proposed settlement. If
the Court denies approval, any settlement changes necessary for approval may
not be made, and the lawsuit may continue. If this is what you want to
happen, you must object.
If you wish to object to the proposed settlement you must object to the
proposed settlement in writing. You may also appear at the fairness hearing
for final approval of the settlement, either in person or through your own
attorney. But if you wish to appear and present your objection orally at
the fairness hearing, you must first submit a written objection and in your
written objection you must indicate your intention to appear and be heard at
the fairness hearing. If you appear through your own attorney, you are
responsible for paying that attorney. All written objections and supporting
papers must (a) clearly identify the case name and number, National
Federation of the Blind of California, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et
al., Case No. 3:14-cv-4086 (N.D. Cal.), (b) be submitted to the Court either
by mailing them to the Clerk of the Court for the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California, 280 South 1st Street, Room
2112, San Jose, CA 95113, or by filing them in person at any location of the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and
(c) be received on or before October 13, 2016.
V. FURTHER INFORMATION
This notice summarizes the proposed settlement. For the precise
terms and conditions of the settlement, please see the settlement agreement
available at www.nfb-serviceanimal-settlement.com, contact Class Counsel
using the information below, access the Court docket in this case through
the Court’s Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system at
https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov, or visit the office of the Clerk of the Court
for the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, 280 South 1st Street, Room 2112, San Jose, CA 95113, between
9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Court holidays.
To obtain a copy of this notice in alternate accessible formats,
contact Class Counsel using the information below.
VI. CONTACT INFORMATION
Please do not contact the Court, the Court clerk’s office, or
Defense Counsel with questions about this settlement. Any questions must be
directed to Class Counsel at the numbers and addresses below.
Class Counsel:
Laurence Paradis
Disability Rights Advocates
2001 Center Street, Fourth Floor
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 665-8644
Timothy Elder, Esq.
TRE Legal Practice
4226 Castanos Street
Fremont, California 94536
(410) 415-3493
Michael Bien
Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld LLP
50 Fremont Street, 19th Floor
San Francisco, California 94105-2235
(415) 433-6830
David Andrews and Long White Cane Harry
dandrews at visi.com or david.andrews at nfbnet.org
Twitter: @dandrews920
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/oagdu_nfbnet.org/attachments/20160802/4ed30bde/attachment.html>
More information about the OAGDU
mailing list