Uber and Former Employees Trade Jabs in New Suit That Hearkens Back to 'Waymo v Uber'
A lawyer for four former Uber employees who are in the company's legal crosshairs claims in court papers that his clients have "information that would be problematic for Uber's image-cleansing campaign if revealed."
December 05, 2018 at 06:26 PM
3 minute read
What's old is new again.
Uber Technologies Inc. last week sued four former employees who worked in the ride-hailing company's corporate intelligence team seeking to force them to return company equipment and documents.
Uber's lawyers at Covington & Burling claim in the suit filed in San Francisco Superior Court on Nov. 28 that lawyers for the four former employees—Matthew Henley, Nicholas Gicinto, Edward Russo and Jacob Nocon—disclosed that they were holding onto company hard drives and laptops, and that the former employees had planned to use privileged documents from the trove of company material to demonstrate that Uber officials defamed them.
The suit is another example of Uber's legal fallout following an inflamatory letter from its manager of global intelligence, Richard Jacobs, over a year after it derailed a scheduled trial date in the company's driverless car trade secrets showdown with Waymo LLC.
Jacobs made allegations that Uber's intelligence team surveilled, spied on and stole trade secret from competitors. When the San Francisco U.S. Attorney's office sent a copy of the letter it received to U.S. District William Alsup, he pushed back the trial date and held a hearing to try to determine whether Uber should have handed the letter over to Waymo.
In the wake of the Jacobs imbroglio, Henley, Gicinto, Russo and Nocon sued their former colleague for defamation claiming that his allegations about them were false and damaged their reputations. All four have since left Uber and, according to Uber's new lawsuit, their lawyer has taken aim at Uber and executives with further defamation claims.
Matthew Umhofer of Spertus, Landes & Umhofer in Los Angeles, a former federal prosecutor who represents the four former employees, quickly responded to Uber's lawsuit with an answer filed Nov. 30. In it, Umhofer claims that the material Uber claims is privileged, including three documents attached to a draft complaint he sent to the company's lawyers, could “prove criminal conduct at Uber.”
Umhoffer contends that his clients cooperated with the company during its internal investigation of Jacobs' allegations, and in the company's defense in the Waymo lawsuit. The company didn't complain about their possession of company property or privileged material until after Uber received a draft of their amended defamation complaint adding the company and executives, Umhoffer claims.
“The draft complaint included a description of facts concerning a number of deeply troubling practices at Uber that have not been publicly revealed and—unlike the Jacobs allegations—are actually true,” Umhoffer wrote. “The conduct includes potentially criminal initiatives against competitors, secret capabilities embedded in Uber's smartphone applications, and offensive intrusions into the privacy of users.”
Uber spokesman Matt Kallman, in an email statement, said that the company doesn't “object to these former employees making any claims they wish.”
“What we do object to is their walking off with company property and their misuse of privileged information for personal gain,” he wrote.
Read Uber's complaint:
Read the employees' answer:
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFederal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
2 minute readBiden commutes sentences for 37 of 40 federal death row inmates, including two convicted of California murders
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250