arrow left
arrow right
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
  • CHI MING FUNG VS. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - VEHICLE RELATED document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 BETH GOLUB (SBN 123584) Beth.golub@wilsonelser.com 2 NATASHA ZASLOVE (SBN 178917) natasha.zaslove@wilsonelser.com 3 WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ ELECTRONICALLY EDELMAN & DICKER LLP FILED 4 525 Market Street, 17th Floor Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco San Francisco, Ca 94105 5 Telephone: (415) 433-0990 07/13/2020 Facsimile: (415) 434-1370 Clerk of the Court BY: EDWARD SANTOS 6 Deputy Clerk Attorneys for Defendant 7 UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RASIER, LLC, and RASIER-CA, LLC 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 11 CHI MING FUNG, Case No. CGC-20-584052 12 Plaintiffs, DEFENDANT UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. COMPLAINT 14 UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC, a Delaware Corporation; RASIER, LLC, a Delaware 15 Limited Liability Company; RASIER-CA, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; COMPLAINT: 04/06/2020 16 RENAN QUENIDI BORGES DOS SANTOS, TRIAL: TBD an Individual; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 17 Defendants. 18 19 20 COMES NOW, Defendant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (hereinafter “Defendant”), 21 severing itself from all other co-defendants, and answering the Complaint (hereinafter 22 “Complaint”) on file herein as follows: 23 1. Inasmuch as the Complaint is not verified under the provisions of Section 431.30 24 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, this answering Defendant denies generally each, every 25 and all of the allegations in said Complaint, and the whole thereof, including denial of all sums 26 and amounts alleged, to be alleged or otherwise. 27 /// 28 /// 1 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 2 2. This answering Defendant does not, by stating the matters set forth in these 3 defenses, allege or admit that it has the burden of proof and/or persuasion with respect to any of 4 these matters, and does not assume the burden of proof or persuasion as to any matters to which 5 Plaintiff has the burden of proof or persuasion. 6 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 [Apportionment of Fault] 8 3. As and for a first, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to each 9 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 10 and based thereon alleges: Defendant denies it was negligent in any fashion with respect to the 11 damages, losses, injuries and debts claimed by the Plaintiff in the Complaint on file herein; 12 however, if this answering Defendant is found to be negligent (which supposition is denied and 13 merely stated for the purpose of this affirmative defense), then this answering Defendant 14 provisionally alleges that Defendant’s negligence is not the sole and proximate cause of the 15 resultant damages, losses and injuries alleged by Plaintiff and that the damages awarded to 16 Plaintiff, if any, be apportioned according to the respective fault of the parties, persons, and 17 entities, or their agents, servants, and employees who contributed to and/or caused said resultant 18 damages as alleged, according to the proof presented at the time of trial. That to assess any greater 19 percentage of fault and damages against this answering Defendant in excess of this answering 20 Defendant’s percentage of fault would be a denial of California equal protection and due process 21 and Federal equal protection and due process, all guaranteed by the respective Constitutions. 22 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 [Comparative Fault] 24 4. As and for a second, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to each 25 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 26 and based thereon alleges: That the injuries to the Plaintiff, if any, were sustained in that Plaintiff 27 failed to exercise ordinary and reasonable care or caution concerning the matters alleged in the 28 Complaint; and such negligence on Plaintiff’s part constitutes a bar to any recovery by said 2 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 Plaintiff, or in the alternative, the recovery, if any, by said Plaintiff should be reduced in proportion 2 to the extent such negligence was a cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, if any. 3 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 4 [Assumption of Risk] 5 5. As and for a third, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 6 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 7 and based thereon alleges: Plaintiff knowingly, willingly and voluntarily assumed the risk of all 8 damages, if any. 9 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 [Equitable Indemnity] 11 6. As and for a fourth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 12 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 13 and based thereon alleges: Any and all events, happenings, injuries and damages set forth in the 14 Complaint, if any, were proximately caused and contributed to by the acts and/or omissions of 15 Plaintiff, and such acts and/or omissions totally bar or reduce any recovery on the part of Plaintiff. 16 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 [No Duty] 18 7. As and for a fifth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 19 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 20 and based thereon alleges: Any recovery on the Complaint, or any claim for relief averred therein, 21 is barred to the extent this answering Defendant owed no duty to Plaintiff. 22 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 [No Causation] 24 8. As and for a sixth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 25 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 26 and based thereon alleges: To the extent Plaintiff suffered damages, which Defendant denies, such 27 injury or damage was not proximately caused by any conduct or inaction of this answering 28 Defendant, or was not foreseeable, or both. 3 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Alleged Injury or Damage Caused by Others] 3 9. As and for a seventh, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 4 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 5 and based thereon alleges: To the extent Plaintiff suffered injury or damage, which Defendant 6 denies, such injury or damage was caused by the action or conduct of others, not this answering 7 Defendant. 8 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 [Existing Prior Injury] 10 10. As and for an eighth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 11 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 12 and based thereon alleges: To the extent Plaintiff suffered injury or damage, which Defendant 13 denies, such injury or damage was sustained prior to the incident alleged by the Plaintiff in the 14 Complaint on file herein. 15 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16 [Uncertainty] 17 11. As and for a ninth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 18 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 19 and based thereon alleges: Plaintiff’s Complaint and the allegations thereof are uncertain, vague 20 and ambiguous. 21 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 [Limitation on Damages] 23 12. As and for a tenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 24 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 25 and based thereon alleges: Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks an award of improper damages, including 26 but not limited to medical damages beyond those permitted by law. 27 /// 28 /// 4 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Offset] 3 13. As and for an eleventh, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to 4 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 5 believes and based thereon alleges: That the costs incurred, or paid by the Plaintiff, if any, for 6 repair of property damage, medical care, dental care, custodial care or rehabilitation services, loss 7 of earning or other economic loss, in the past or future, were or will, with reasonable certainty be 8 replaced or indemnified, in whole or in part, from one or more collateral source, including by or 9 through insurance available to the Plaintiff under the terms of the Patient Protection and Affordable 10 Care Act, and as such the Defendant is entitled to have any award reduced in the amount of such 11 payments. 12 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 [Howell v. Hamilton Meats] 14 14. As and for a twelfth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to each 15 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 16 and based thereon alleges: Plaintiff’s recovery for past medical expenses or other economic loss 17 or benefit, if any, is limited to the lesser of the amount paid or the reasonable value of those services 18 or benefits. 19 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 [Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act] 21 15. As and for a thirteenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 22 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 23 believes and based thereon alleges: Plaintiff is excluded from recovering any amounts which have 24 been, or will, indemnify Plaintiff, for any past or future claimed medical expenses, health care, life 25 care, or other economic loss or benefit that is offered, or provided under or in connection with the 26 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 27 /// 28 /// 5 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Failure to Obtain Health Insurance] 3 16. As and for a fourteenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 4 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 5 believes and based thereon alleges: In the event Plaintiff has failed to obtain health insurance 6 coverage available to her, which he is eligible to obtain under the Patient Protection and Affordable 7 Care Act, Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages and cannot recover for such failure. 8 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 [Failure to Utilize Health Insurance Benefits] 10 17. As and for a fifteenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 11 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 12 believes and based thereon alleges: To the extent Plaintiff failed to take reasonable steps to avail 13 herself of the resources, service benefits, and coverage available to her under the Patient Protection 14 and Affordable Care Act, Plaintiff has failed to mitigate her damages and cannot recover for such 15 failure. 16 SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 [Affordable Care Act and Future Damages] 18 18. As and for a sixteenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 19 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 20 believes and based thereon alleges: Plaintiff will be limited to the reasonable value, if any, of 21 future medical services available to her under the Affordable Care Act. 22 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 [No Injury or Damage] 24 19. As and for a seventeenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to 25 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 26 believes and based thereon alleges: This answering Defendant denies Plaintiff suffered any injury 27 or damage whatsoever, and further denies it is liable to Plaintiff for any injury or damage claimed 28 or for any injury or damage whatsoever. 6 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Vicarious Liability] 3 20. As and for an eighteenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 4 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 5 believes and based thereon alleges: This answering Defendant denies Plaintiff suffered any injury 6 or damage whatsoever, and further denies it is vicariously liable for the acts of other parties. 7 NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8 [Fails to State Facts – General] 9 21. As and for a nineteenth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 10 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 11 believes and based thereon alleges: That the Complaint, and each purported cause of action 12 contained therein, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering 13 Defendant. 14 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 [Statute of Limitations] 16 22. As and for a twentieth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint and to 17 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 18 believes and based thereon alleges: Each said cause of action is barred by the applicable statute 19 of limitations, including but not limited to, California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 335.1, 20 337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, 339, 340 and/or 343. 21 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 [Failure to Mitigate Loss] 23 23. As and for a twenty-first, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to 24 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 25 believes and based thereon alleges: That if Plaintiff suffered any damage as a result of the 26 allegations set forth in the Complaint, Plaintiff is not entitled to recover from this answering 27 Defendant any sum of damages due to Plaintiff’s failure to take reasonable efforts to mitigate the 28 damages said Plaintiff allegedly incurred. 7 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Estoppel] 3 24. As and for a twenty-second, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 4 to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 5 believes and based thereon alleges: That each and every cause of action or purported cause of 6 action contained in the Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of Estoppel. 7 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8 [Waiver] 9 25. As and for a twenty-third, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 10 to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 11 believes and based thereon alleges: That each and every cause of action or purported cause of 12 action contained in the Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of Waiver. 13 TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 [Laches] 15 26. As and for a twenty-fourth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 16 to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 17 believes and based thereon alleges: That each and every cause of action or purported cause of 18 action contained in the Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of Laches. 19 TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 [Unclean Hands] 21 27. As and for a twenty-fifth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to 22 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 23 believes and based thereon alleges: That each and every cause of action or purported cause of 24 action contained in the Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of Unclean Hands. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 8 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Collateral Estoppel] 3 28. As and for a twenty-sixth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 4 to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 5 believes and based thereon alleges: That each and every cause of action or purported cause of 6 action contained in the Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel. 7 TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8 [Voluntary Conduct] 9 29. As and for a twenty-seventh, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, 10 and to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 11 believes and based thereon alleges: That Plaintiff has engaged in conduct with respect to the 12 activities and/or property which are the subject of the Complaint, and by reason of said activities 13 and conduct, is estopped from asserting any claims or damages or seeking any other relief against 14 this answering Defendant. 15 TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16 [Damages Uncertain] 17 30. As and for a twenty-eighth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 18 to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 19 believes and based thereon alleges: That Plaintiff’s damages, if any, are speculative, uncertain and 20 not capable of being determined by a trier of fact. 21 TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 [Intervening Superseding Causes] 23 31. As and for a twenty-ninth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 24 to each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 25 believes and based thereon alleges: The damages of which Plaintiff complains were proximately 26 caused or contributed to by the acts of other defendants, persons and/or other entities. Such acts 27 were an intervening, supervening and superseding cause of the injuries and damages, if any, of 28 which the Plaintiff complains, thus barring Plaintiff from any recovery against this answering 9 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 Defendant. 2 THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3 [No Vicarious or Agency Liability] 4 32. As and for a thirtieth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, Defendant 5 alleges that at no time or place set forth in the Complaint did any other defendant or third person 6 alleged to be at fault operate as the agent or employee of Defendant, such that Defendant can be 7 held vicariously liable for their acts. Should any other defendant or third party be deemed to have 8 any affiliation with this Defendant, then such other defendant or third party was independently 9 responsible for their own means and methods. Accordingly, the doctrines of respondeat superior 10 and agency are inapplicable and Uber Technologies, Inc. has no vicarious liability for acts or 11 omissions by said other defendants or third parties. 12 THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 [Independent Contractor] 14 33. As and for a thirty-first, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and as 15 to each and every cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant alleges that the 16 Complaint and each cause of action set forth therein are barred, in whole or in part, under the 17 independent contractor defense, as co-Defendant Driver was an independent contractor responsible 18 for his own means and methods, making the doctrine of respondeat superior inapplicable. 19 THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 [Failure to State Cause of Action] 21 34. As and for a thirty-second, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, a 22 separate and distinct affirmative defense, this answering Defendant is informed and believes and 23 thereon alleges that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action therein alleged against 24 Defendant fails to set forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering 25 Defendant. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 10 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Joint and Several Liability] 3 35. As and for thirty-third, separate and affirmative defense, this answering Defendant 4 alleges that the liability of this answering Defendant for the non-economic damages claimed or 5 proven by Plaintiff shall be and is limited by California Civil Code § 1431.2. 6 THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 [Not a Common Carrier] 8 36. As and for a thirty-fourth separate affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 9 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes, 10 and based thereon alleges: Defendant is a technology company and is not a transportation company 11 or a common carrier. Therefore, any and all claims asserted by Plaintiff under a common carrier 12 theory are barred. 13 THIRTY FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 [Consent] 15 37. As and for a thirty-fifth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to 16 each purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and 17 believes and based thereon alleges: That each and every cause of action or purported cause of 18 action contained in the Complaint is barred due to the consent by Plaintiff to all actions alleged 19 therein. 20 THIRTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21 [Contractual Indemnity] 22 38. As and for a thirty-sixth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, 23 Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Co-Defendant, driver, is 24 contractually obligated to defend, indemnify and hold Defendant harmless for all claims asserted 25 by Plaintiff. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 11 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 THIRTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 [Arbitration Agreement] 3 39. As and for a thirty-seventh, separate and affirmative defense, this answering 4 Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges this dispute is subject to an arbitration 5 agreement between Plaintiff and this answering Defendant, such that this matter is properly 6 brought before a qualified arbitrator rather than in the instant court. 7 THIRTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8 [No Seatbelt Usage] 9 40. As and for a thirty-eighth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and 10 to each purported cause of action therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes, and 11 thereon alleges: Plaintiff’s recovery is barred or proportionately reduced due to her failure to wear 12 the available restraining device or to wear it properly. 13 THIRTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 [Proposition 213] 15 41. As and for a thirty-ninth, separate and affirmative defense, this answering 16 Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that Plaintiff was uninsured at the time of 17 the incident alleged in the Complaint. Under Proposition 213, Civil Code section 3333.4, Plaintiff 18 is barred from recovering non-economic damages. 19 FORTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 [Reserved Defenses] 21 42. As and for a fortieth, separate and affirmative defense to the Complaint, and to each 22 purported cause of action contained therein, this answering Defendant is informed and believes 23 and based thereon alleges: That this answering Defendant presently has insufficient knowledge or 24 insufficient information upon which to form a belief as to whether it may have additional, yet 25 unasserted, affirmative defenses. Defendant therefore reserves the right to assert additional 26 affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates it would be appropriate. 27 /// 28 /// 12 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 2 1. That Plaintiff takes nothing by virtue of Plaintiff’s Complaint; 3 2. For costs of suit incurred herein; and 4 3. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. 5 Dated: July 13, 2020 WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER, LLP 6 7 By: 8 BETH GOLUB NATASHA ZASLOVE 9 Attorneys for Defendant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RASIER, 10 LLC, and RASIER-CA, LLC 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 13 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 PROOF OF SERVICE Fung v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al 2 San Francisco County Case No. CGC-20-584052 3 I, the undersigned, am employed in the county of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 525 Market Street, 4 17th Floor, San Francisco CA 94105. 5 On the date indicated below, I caused to be served the following document(s) described as follows: 6 DEFENDANT UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S 7 COMPLAINT 8 : PERSONAL SERVICE - I served the documents by placing them in an envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed below, and providing them to a 9 professional messenger service for service. (A confirmation by the messenger will be provided to our office after the documents have been delivered.) 10 : BY MAIL - As follows: I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection and 11 processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at San Francisco, 12 California in the ordinary course of business. The envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing on this date following our ordinary practices. I am aware that on 13 motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 14 : OVERNIGHT MAIL - As follows: I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of 15 processing correspondence for mailing overnight via Federal Express. Under that practice it would be deposited in a Federal Express drop box, indicating overnight delivery, with 16 delivery fees provided for, on that same day, at San Francisco, California. 17 : BY E-MAIL - Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by e-mail or electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the e- 18 mail addresses listed below. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was 19 unsuccessful. 20 : ONLY BY EMAIL TRANSMISSION - The above-referenced document(s) are only being served by email due to the ongoing shelter-in-place and travel restrictions relating to 21 the coronavirus (COVID-19). We will of course extend the same courtesy to your office. Please immediately advise of any objections, and we will serve hard copies upon request. 22 Our attorneys and staff are reachable through their regular phone numbers and email addresses, and the office remains open on a remote basis during regular business hours. 23 : BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION – By causing the document(s) listed above to be 24 electronically filed and served on designated recipients through the Electronic Case Filing system for the above-entitled case. The file transmission was reported as successful and a 25 copy of the Electronic Case Filing Receipt will be maintained with the original document(s) in our office. 26 27 28 14 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1 1 Executed on July 13, 2020, at San Francisco, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the above is true and correct. 2 3 4 Marilee Barlow 5 6 7 SERVICE LIST 8 Haytham Faraj Carpenter Zuckerman & Rowley 9 407 Bryant Circle, Ste. F Ojai CA 93023 10 T: 805-272-4001 E: team3@czrlaw.com 11 Attorney for Plaintiff 12 Chi Ming Fung 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 15 Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc.’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint 2412873v.1