Case Activity (254535)

1. Filed: August 14, 2026 | Entered: August 14, 2026 Kurin, Inc. v. ICU Medical, Inc. et al

   Trademark | California Central

   -Transcript Order Form (G-120)

   TRANSCRIPT ORDER as to Plaintiff Kurin, Inc. for Court Smart (CS). Court will contact Christopher Bright at cbright@swlaw.com with further instructions regarding this order. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the transcription company. (Bright, Christopher)

2. Order | Filed: August 14, 2026 | Entered: August 14, 2026 In re: Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation

   Assault Libel & Slander | California Northern

   Order on Discovery Letter Brief

   ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros: Pending before the Court is the parties' 6858 Joint Letter Regarding Plaintiff Jane Doe QLF 001's 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice Regarding Ride Matching and Risk Assessment. Uber argues that a protective order, precluding the 30(b)(6) deposition topics outlined in ECF No. 6858-2, is warranted because S-RAD was not instituted until July 2022 and the bellwether incident occurred in North Carolina in 2019. Defendants further argue that such 30(b)(6) testimony would be irrelevant and disproportional to the needs of the case, and duplicative of prior testimony. Plaintiffs correctly argue that the disputed 30(b)(6) topics are broader than just S-RAD, focusing on what measures Uber took, or could have taken, at the time of the bellwether Plaintiff's ride, and how this specific driver-rider pairing was reached. The Court finds that, even though S-RAD was not implemented until 2022, the 30(b)(6) topics at issue here are broader than the S-RAD. The topics therein focus on what Uber did, or could have done, to mitigate the risk of her sexual assault. Plaintiffs are entitled to explore the evidence relevant to specific causation. Uber's proposed affidavit would not provide adequate insight into what specific risk factors Uber could have focused on. In this instance, S-RAD is merely a subset of the potential considerations relevant to this inquiry. The topics are relevant and proportional to this litigation. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants are ORDERED to provide a designated witness to sit for the deposition noticed, see ECF No. 6858-2, by no later than August 25, 2026. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ljclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2026)

3. 254533 additional result(s)