Beth Sherwood, left, and Chris Pardo, right, of Hunton Andrews Kurth. Courtesy photos Elizabeth Sherwood, left, and Christopher Pardo, right, of Hunton Andrews Kurth. Courtesy photos

In an unusual ruling, Pennsylvania federal judge Michael M. Baylson invoked a court's inherent powers to manage its docket in dismissing with prejudice a long-running lawsuit against Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber) but also awarded—after two hung juries—victory to Uber by granting its Rule 50(b) motion for judgement as a matter of law. See Razak v. Uber Technologies, No. CV 16-573, 2024 WL 3584324, *1 (E.D. Pa. July 30, 2024).

Plaintiffs attorneys vowed to appeal both of Uber's victories. But according to Uber's attorneys, dismissal was long overdue. After almost nine years of litigation, including Uber's initial win on summary judgment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's subsequent reversal, and two hung juries, the case needed to end before proceeding to a third jury trial. See Razak, 2024 WL 3584324 at *1; see memorandum of law in support of motion for judgement as a matter of law (Uber's Rule 50 Memo), ECF 341-1 at p. 7, Razak v. Uber Technologies, 2:16CV00573 (E.D. Pa. July 1, 2024).