Uber IPO Class Action Adds New Claimants Despite Company Protests

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Uber IPO Class Action Lawsuit Overview:

• Why: The judge ruled the plaintiffs fulfilled the requirements to be added into the claim.
• Who: A California federal judge denied Uber’s motion to dismiss new plaintiffs added to an existing class action lawsuit.
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

A California federal judge rejected Uber’s attempt to prevent new plaintiffs from joining an existing class action against the ride-sharing company over its allegedly incomplete and misleading reports ahead of its 2019 initial public offering (IPO). 

Uber Technologies Inc argued in a motion to dismiss newly named plaintiffs that court precedent prevented them from doing so. However, US District Judge Richard Seeborg ruled that the precedent cited by Uber does not apply, and that the new plaintiffs have met the necessary requirements. 

Investors Misled by False Reports Prior to Uber IPO

The lead plaintiff of the class action lawsuit is Boston Retirement Services (BRS), the pension fund for city employees of Boston. The new plaintiffs, David Messinger, Ellie Marie Toronto ESA, Joseph Cianci, and Irving S. and Judith Braun, were part of a similar class action lawsuit that was consolidated with the BRS case in January. 

The consolidated class action lawsuit accuses Uber of falsely reporting its regulatory compliance and overall financial health, employing a “growth at any cost” business model while disregarding regulatory law and the safety of riders, and downplaying reports of mismanagement, sexual harassment, and a toxic work culture. All of Uber’s actions led to a “trainwreck” for its investors, according to the complaint. 

Did you invest in Uber when it IPO’d? What did you think? Tell us about it in the comments section below!

Boston Retirement System is represented by Jonathan Gardner, Alfred L. Fatale III, Joseph N. Cotilletta, Marco A. Duenas, and Lisa Strejlau of Labaton Sucharow LLP and by Gregory M. Nespole and Adam M. Apton of Levi & Korsinsky LLP.

The Messinger plaintiffs are represented by John T. Jasnoch, David R. Scott, and William C. Fredericks of Scott + Scott Attorneys At Law LLP; Samuel H. Rudman, James I. Jaconette, Henry Rosen, Sara B. Polychron, and Juan Carlos Sanchez of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP; Mark C. Molumphy, Tyson Redenbarger, Noorjahan Rahman, and Julia Peng of Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy LLP; and Curtis V. Trinko of the Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko.

The Uber IPO Class Action Lawsuit is Boston Retirement System, et al. v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al., Case No. 3:19-cv- 06361, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• What Can You Do if You Were Assaulted During an Uber Ride?
• Lyft Sexual Assault Cases on the Rise
• Is USKO Express Underpaying Its Truck Drivers?
• Is USKO Express Misclassifying Their Truck Drivers as Independent Contractors?