Uber Fair Credit Class Action

JS 44 (Rev.
12/12) cand rev (1/15/13)
Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1-1 Filed11/24/14 Page1 of 2
CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS
DEFENDANTS
ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; RASIER, LLC; HIREASE, LLC; and

DOES 1-50
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff
County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
Suffolk County, MA
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

NOTE:
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
Attorneys (If Known)
Tina Wolfson, AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC

1016 Palm Avenue, West Hollywood, CA 90069
T: 310-474-9111; F: 310-474-8585; E: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only)

1
U.S. Government
Plaintiff
Federal Question
(U.S. Government Not a Party)
U.S. Government
Defendant
Diversity
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)

CONTRACT
DEF
1
Citizen of Another State
Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country
Foreign Nation
TORTS
110 Insurance
120 Marine
130 Miller Act
140 Negotiable Instrument
150 Recovery of Overpayment
& Enforcement of Judgment
151 Medicare Act
152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans
(Excludes Veterans)
153 Recovery of Overpayment
of Veterans Benefits
160 Stockholders Suits
190 Other Contract
195 Contract Product Liability
196 Franchise
(For Diversity Cases Only)

PTF
Citizen of This State
1
REAL PROPERTY
210 Land Condemnation
220 Foreclosure
230 Rent Lease & Ejectment
240 Torts to Land
245 Tort Product Liability
290 All Other Real Property
PERSONAL INJURY
310 Airplane
315 Airplane Product
Liability
320 Assault, Libel &
Slander
330 Federal Employers
Liability
340 Marine
345 Marine Product
Liability
350 Motor Vehicle
355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability
360 Other Personal
Injury
362 Personal Injury Medical Malpractice
CIVIL RIGHTS
440 Other Civil Rights
441 Voting
442 Employment
443 Housing/
Accommodations
445 Amer. w/Disabilities Employment
446 Amer. w/Disabilities Other
448 Education
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
PERSONAL INJURY
365 Personal Injury Product Liability
367 Health Care/
Pharmaceutical
Personal Injury
Product Liability
368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY
370 Other Fraud
371 Truth in Lending
380 Other Personal
Property Damage
385 Property Damage
Product Liability
PRISONER PETITIONS
Habeas Corpus:
463 Alien Detainee
510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
530 General
535 Death Penalty
Other:
540 Mandamus & Other
550 Civil Rights
555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Detainee Conditions of
Confinement
625 Drug Related Seizure

of Property 21 USC 881
690 Other
and One Box for Defendant)

PTF
DEF
Incorporated or Principal Place
4
4
of Business In This State
BANKRUPTCY
422 Appeal 28 USC 158
423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
PROPERTY RIGHTS
820 Copyrights
830 Patent
840 Trademark
LABOR
710 Fair Labor Standards
Act
720 Labor/Management
Relations
740 Railway Labor Act
751 Family and Medical
Leave Act
790 Other Labor Litigation
791 Employee Retirement
Income Security Act
SOCIAL SECURITY
861 HIA (1395ff)
862 Black Lung (923)
863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
864 SSID Title XVI
865 RSI (405(g))
FEDERAL TAX SUITS

870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff
or Defendant)
871 IRSThird Party
26 USC 7609
OTHER STATUTES
375 False Claims Act

400 State Reapportionment
410 Antitrust
430 Banks and Banking
450 Commerce
460 Deportation
470 Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations
480 Consumer Credit
490 Cable/Sat TV
850 Securities/Commodities/
Exchange
890 Other Statutory Actions
891 Agricultural Acts
893 Environmental Matters
895 Freedom of Information
Act
896 Arbitration
899 Administrative Procedure
Act/Review or Appeal of
Agency Decision
950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes
IMMIGRATION
462 Naturalization Application
465 Other Immigration
Actions
V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)

1 Original
Proceeding
2 Removed from
State Court
Remanded from
Appellate Court
4 Reinstated or
Reopened
5 Transferred from
Another District
(specify)
6 Multidistrict
Litigation
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
15 U.S.C. 1681b
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Violations of Federal Consumer Reporting Agencies Act
CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

VII. REQUESTED IN
UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.
COMPLAINT:
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY
JUDGE
DATE
CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

Yes
No
JURY DEMAND:
DEMAND $
5,000,000.00
DOCKET NUMBER
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
/s/ Tina Wolfson
11/24/2014
,;',9,6,21$/$66,*10(17&LYLO/5
(Place an X in One Box Only)
Print
( ) SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND
Save As...
( ) SAN JOSE
( ) EUREKA
Reset
JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/12)
Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1-1 Filed11/24/14 Page2 of 2
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a)
(b)
(c)
Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
II.
Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
III.
Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
IV.
Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is
sufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerk(s) in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than
one nature of suit, select the most definitive.
V.
Origin. Place an "X" in one of the six boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407.
When this box is checked, do not check (5) above.
VI.
Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
VII.
Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.
Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page1 of 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TINA WOLFSON, SBN 174806

twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
ROBERT AHDOOT, SBN 172098
rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
THEODORE W. MAYA, SBN 223242
tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
BRADLEY K. KING, SBN 274399
bking@ahdootwolfson.com
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, P.C.
1016 Palm Ave.
West Hollywood, California 90069
Tel: 310-474-9111; Fax: 310-474-8585
Counsel for Plaintiff
ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED
10
11
12
13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
San Francisco Division
14
15
16
ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED, individually and on Case No. 14-5200

behalf of all others similarly situated,
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
17
Plaintiff,
18
v.
19
20
21
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; RASIER, LLC;

HIREASE, LLC; and DOES 1-50,
Defendants
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT, NO. 14-5200
Plaintiff ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED, by and through his counsel, brings this Class Action
1
2
Complaint against UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (Uber); RASIER, LLC (Rasier); HIREASE,
LLC (Hirease); and DOES 1-50 (collectively, Defendants), on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, and alleges, upon personal knowledge as to his own actions and his counsels
investigations, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, as follows:
NATURE OF THE CASE
6
1.
This class action challenges Defendants widespread violations of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681-81x (FCRA), in employment background screening. This case
further challenges Defendants widespread violations of related California and Massachusetts laws,
10
including the Massachusetts Consumer Credit Reporting Act (MCRA) M.G.L. c. 93 50 et seq.,
11
and the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCRAA), Cal. Civ. Code 1785.1 et
12
seq.
13
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
14
15
16
17
2.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 because this action
arises under the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., which is a federal statute.
3.
The Court also has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
18
1332(d)(2), because the proposed class has more than 100 members, the class contains at least one
19
member of diverse citizenship from Defendants, and the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million.
20
4.
The Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because Defendant UBER
21
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. has its principal place of business in this District at 800 Market Street, 7th
22
Floor, San Francisco, CA 94102, and Defendant RASIER, LLC has its principal place of business in
23
this District at 1455 Market Street 4th floor, San Francisco, CA, 94103. Defendants are authorized to,
24
and do, conduct substantial business in California.
25
5.
Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(a)(1), because a
26
substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to this action occurred in this District in
27
Defendants Uber and Rasiers offices here.
28
29
30
31
1
6.
Intradistrict Assignment: Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-2(c) a substantial part of the
events or omissions which give rise to the claims occurred in San Francisco County, and it is therefore
appropriate to assign this action to the San Francisco Division.

PARTIES
4
5
6
7
7.
Plaintiff ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED is an individual and a resident of Boston,
Massachusetts.
8.
Defendant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. is a company that conducts business
throughout the United States. Uber is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Delaware
with its principal place of business at 800 Market Street, 7th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94102.
10
9.
Defendant RASIER, LLC is, on information and belief, a wholly owned subsidiary of
11
Uber. Rasier is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the state of Delaware with its
12
principal place of business at 1455 Market Street 4th floor, San Francisco, CA, 94103.
13
10.
Defendant HIREASE, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of
14
the state of Florida with its principal place of business at 695 S. Bennett St, Southern Pines, NC
15
28387.
16
11.
At all times relevant hereto, Uber and Rasier were users of consumer reports and
17
therefore subject to regulation under 15 U.S.C. 1681b, Cal. Civ. Code 1785.20.5, and M.G.L. c 93
18
50. Hirease is a producer of such reports subject to regulation under the same laws.
19
12.
Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities of the defendants sued as DOES
20
1-50, and therefore sues these defendants by fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave to amend this
21
Complaint when and if the true identities of these DOE defendants are discovered. Plaintiff is
22
informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the Defendants designated as a DOE is
23
responsible in some manner for the acts and occurrences alleged herein, whether such acts or
24
occurrences were committed intentionally, negligently, recklessly or otherwise, and that each said
25
DOE defendant thereby proximately caused injuries and damages to Plaintiff as herein alleged, and is
26
thus liable for the damages suffered by Plaintiff.
27
28
29
30
31
13.
On information and belief, at all times mentioned herein, each named Defendant and
DOES 1-50 were the employees, agents, or representatives of each other and were acting with the
2
knowledge and consent of each other Defendant and within the purpose and scope of such
employment, agency or representation in doing or failing to do the acts alleged in this Complaint.
Each Defendant has ratified and approved the acts of its agents.
SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS
4
5
14.
To protect employees, FCRA, CCRAA, and MCRA impose certain strictures on
employers use of consumer background reports as a factor in their decisions to hire, promote,
reassign, or terminate employees. Specifically, the statutes require that an employer first disclose its
intent to use a background report in its hiring decision and must obtain the prospective employees
written authorization to do so, and the employers disclosure must be in a document that consists
10
11
12
13
solely of the disclosure. 15 U.S.C. 1681b(b)(2)(A); see also Cal. Civ. Code 1785.20.5(a).
15.
Hirease contracts with Uber and Rasier to provide background screening services, and
Uber and Rasier make use of such information in hiring decisions.

16.
Misreported information can and does often lead to grave consequences for the job
14
seeker. Thus, Congress enacted the FCRA to insure consumer information is furnished and used in a
15
manner that is fair and equitable to the consumer . . . 15 U.S.C. 1681(b).
16
17.
Accordingly, under the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681b(b)(3)(A), before taking any adverse
17
employment action based in whole or in part on a consumer report, the employer must provide to the
18
job applicant:
19
a.
A copy of the consumer report;
20
b.
A description in writing of the rights of the consumer under the FCRA; and
21
c.
A reasonable opportunity to dispute the information before rendering the

adverse employment decision.
22
23
18.
The MCRA contains similar strictures, but adds certain language protecting and
24
advising consumers of their rights that employers must include in their notices at the varying stages.
25
See MCRA, M.G.L. c. 93 62.
26
19.
The MCRA also requires that companies such as Hirease provide a copy of any
27
consumer report procured by Uber or Raiser to Plaintiff and to other similarly situated applicants or
28
employee at the time it provides any such report to Uber or Rasier. M.G.L. c. 93 60.
29
30
31
3
20.
Similarly, the CCRAA requires that: Prior to requesting a consumer credit report for
employment purposes, the user of the report shall provide written notice to the person involved. The
notice shall inform the person that a report will be used, and shall identify the specific basis under
subdivision (a) of Section 1024.5 of the Labor Code for use of the report. The notice shall also inform
the person of the source of the report, and shall contain a box that the person may check off to receive
a copy of the credit report. If the consumer indicates that he or she wishes to receive a copy of the
report, the user shall request that a copy be provided to the person when the user requests its copy
from the credit reporting agency. The report to the user and to the subject person shall be provided
contemporaneously and at no charge to the subject person. Cal. Civ. Code 1785.20(a)
10
21.
The FCRA also requires that, after any adverse action occurs, the employee or job
11
applicant must receive a second notice, mandated by 15 U.S.C. 1681m(a). (Hereinafter, the pre-
12
adverse action notice and the adverse action notice.)
13
22.
The pre-adverse action notice requirement is unqualified. Employers must comply
14
with the pre-adverse action disclosure requirement even where the information contained in the
15
consumer report (such as a criminal record) would automatically disqualify the individual from
16
employment or lead to an adverse employment action. FTC, 40 years of Experience with the Fair
17
Credit Reporting Act (July 2011) p. 53.
18
23.
The FCRA further requires that before any consumer reporting agency may provide
19
consumer reports on an applicant, the reporting agency must obtain a certification from the employer
20
that the employer has given the required pre-adverse action disclosure and will give the required
21
adverse action notice, if required (i.e., the employer ultimately takes an adverse employment action).
22
15 U.S.C. 1681b(b)(1)(A).
23
24.
The Federal Trade Commission has issued guidance that when an employer enters into
24
a bona fide independent contractor relationship with an individual, it must comply with the applicable
25
provisions of the FCRA pertaining to consumer reports obtained for employment practices. FTC,
26
Advisory Opinion to Allison (02-23-98) available at www.http://www.ftc.gov/policy/advisory-
27
opinions/advisory-opinion-allison-02-23-98 (last viewed Oct. 25, 2014).
28
29
30
31
4
1
2
3
25.
Uber and Rasier are employers and are users of consumer reports for the purposes
of the FCRA and therefore are regulated entities under the FCRA.
26.
Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Uber and Rasier knowingly,
voluntarily, and with the assistance of its counsel, executed a certification providing that it would
comply with various provisions of the FCRA, including by providing the required pre-adverse and
adverse action notices.
27.
Despite its certification, Defendants knowingly violated 15 U.S.C. 1681b(b)(3) and
15 U.S.C. 1681m(a) and similar California and Massachusetts law by failing to provide job
applicants and employees with compliant pre-adverse action notices and adverse action notices in
10
accordance with state and Federal law.

Plaintiffs Experience
11
12
13
28.
After previously working for Uber as an Uber Black driver, Plaintiff applied to Uber
for employment as an Uber X driver using his own car.
14
29.
Plaintiff was told he needed to get a new car for the position.
15
30.
Plaintiff therefore purchased a new car at a cost of approximately $25,000, in late
16
September of 2014.
17
31.
18
own car.
19
32.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
In early October 2014, Plaintiff in fact began working as an Uber X driver using his
Thereafter, on or about October 28, 2014, Plaintiff received an email from
uberreports@hirease.com stating, inter alia:

In reference to your proposal to enter an independent contractor relationship, Rasier
Boston, MA regrets to inform you that they are unable to further consider your proposal
at this time. The decision, in part, is the result of information obtained through the
Consumer Reporting Agency identified below.
33.
At approximately the same time, Plaintiffs access to the Uber app on his phone, which
previously enabled him to work as an Uber driver, was turned off.

34.
While the above-referenced October 28 email also stated indicates that, [i]n
27
accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Plaintiff had previously received a copy of this
28
information and a copy of [his] rights under the Act, Plaintiff did not receive such materials.
29
30
31
5
35.
Plaintiff was deprived of any meaningful opportunity to review the information in the
consumer report and discuss it with Defendants before they made the decision not to hire him,
including because the above-referenced email came at 1:26 a.m., and because Plaintiff never received
any pre-adverse action notice. Defendants did not give meaningful consideration to Plaintiffs
position on any such matter.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
36.
Plaintiff never received a compliant pre-adverse action notice either from Uber, Rasier,
Hirease or any other party contracted by Ubern or Rasier to provide such notice.
37.
On information and belief, Defendants terminated Plaintiff because Hireases consumer
report concerning Plaintiff indicated he had a minor criminal record that, in fact, stems from his seven
children receiving much-needed Medicaid benefits.
38.
Defendants termination of Plaintiff deprived him of his livelihood and left him without
an alternative means of providing for his family, including his seven children.
39.
Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with a copy of any Criminal Offender Record
14
Information (CORI), nor with any CORI or other background check policy. See M.G.L. c. 6
15
171A.
16
40.
17
correcting a criminal record.

Defendants Acted Willfully
18
19
Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with information regarding the process for
41.
Defendants knew or should have known their duties under M.G.L. c. 93 50 et seq. to
20
maintain a CORI policy and to provide a copy of such policy to Plaintiff upon an adverse employment
21
decision.
22
42.
Defendants knew or should have known their duties under the FCRA to provide pre-
23
adverse and adverse action notices compliant with 15 U.S.C. 1681b(b)(3) and 15 U.S.C. 1681m(a).
24
Nevertheless, Defendants intentionally, recklessly, or grossly negligently failed to provide the same to
25
Plaintiff.
26
43.
Defendants knew or should have known their duties to include in the adverse action
27
notice the statutorily-prescribed language under M.G.L. c. 93 62 requiring the Defendants to inform
28
the consumer of his rights in substantially the manner mandated by the statute.
29
30
31
6
44.
Defendants knew or should have known their duties to provide pre-adverse action
notices in compliance with Cal. Civ. Code 1785.20.5(a), but intentionally, recklessly, or grossly
negligently failed to provide the same to Plaintiff.
45.
During the relevant period, Hirease provided and continues to provide consumer reports
to Uber and Rasier under a service agreement. On information and belief, under the service agreement,
Uber and Rasier certified to Hirease that they would comply with the FCRA, including provisions
specifically and directly relating to their duties to provide pre-adverse action and adverse action
notices to its job applicants and employees.
46.
On information and belief, Defendants Uber and Rasier knowingly, voluntarily, and
10
with the assistance of counsel signed the service agreement including the above-mentioned
11
certification.
12
47.
In direct violation of the FCRA, CCRAA, and MCRA, whenever adverse action is
13
taken against an applicant on the basis of information disclosed on a consumer report, Defendants fail
14
to afford the applicants the procedural safeguards mandated by law as described above, including by
15
failing to provide pre-adverse action notices and a reasonable opportunity to dispute information in
16
such reports before taking adverse action.
17
48.
On information and belief, among its service offerings, Hirease provides a package of
18
services which purport to assist the employer in complying with the FCRA by automatically
19
generating and emailing pre-adverse action and adverse action notices to the consumer along with a
20
copy of the consumer report under the employers letterhead whenever there has been an adverse
21
action adjudication by Hirease based on pre-determined criteria supplied by Uber and Rasier.
22
49.
Consumer reporting agencies routinely provide a similar service and many employers
23
purchase it. Uber and Rasier could have easily and cost-effectively complied with the mandates of the
24
FCRA, CCRAA, and MCRA by purchasing such services, but failed to do so.
25
50.
Uber knew or had reason to know that its conduct was inconsistent with published FTC
26
guidance interpreting the FCRA and the plain language of the statute as applicable to independent
27
contractors. Advisory Opinion to Allison (02-23-98) available at <http://www.ftc.gov/policy/advisory-
28
opinions/advisory-opinion-allison-02-23-98> (last viewed November 19, 2014).
29
30
31
7
Defendants Application Process
1
2
3
4
51.
Defendants accept applications for employment as drivers via their website at
<partners.uber.com/drive>.
52.
In the course of its application, Uber presents drivers with the provision By signing
up, I agree to the Privacy Policy and understand that Uber is a request tool, not a transportation
carrier. <https://partners.uber.com/signup/boston/p2p/>.
7
8
9
53.
Ubers application process comprises three steps. Step One requires that the applicant
Complete the FREE online background check: http://t.uber.com/bosxbc.

54.
The document contains language purporting to grant Defendants authorization on an
10
ongoing and continual basis to access and reaccess consumer reports at any time without further
11
authorization of the applicant.
12
55.
Step Two of the application process requires that the applicant upload certain personal
13
information such as a drivers license, car registration, personal insurance documentation, and
14
information about the applicants vehicle.
15
56.
Step Three requires that the applicant complete a 20-minute online quiz.
16
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
17
18
19
57.
Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) and
23(b)(3) on behalf of himself and Classes initially defined as follows:
20
21
a.
Nationwide FCRA Disclosure Class: All persons in the United States who applied for
22
employment with, or were employed by, Defendants Uber and/or Rasier on or after
23
November 24, 2009, and concerning whom Defendants procured a consumer report
24
and who: (1) received no disclosure regarding the possibility of consumer report
25
procurement; or (2) received a disclosure regarding the possibility of consumer report
26
procurement that was not contained in a document consisting solely of such
27
disclosure.
28
29
30
31
8
b.
Nationwide FCRA Adverse Action Class: All persons in the United States who (1)
were subject to adverse employment action on or after November 24, 2009 based in
whole or in part on any consumer report procured by Defendants Uber and/or Rasier;
and (2) to whom Defendants did not provide the written materials required under 15
U.S.C. 1681b(b)(3) prior to Defendants taking such adverse employment action.
6
7
c.
Nationwide CCRAA Class: All persons in the United States who (1) applied for
November 24, 2012; (2) who were the subject of a consumer report procured by
10
Defendant; and (3) who were not provided with prior notice meeting the requirements
11
of Cal. Civ. Code 1785.20.5(a).
12
13
d.
Massachusetts MCRA Class: All persons in Massachusetts who applied for
14
15
November 24, 2012, and (1) received an adverse action notice failing to inform them
16
of their rights as required under M.G.L. c. 93 62; and/or (2) did not receive a copy
17
of the consumer report(s) on which Defendants relied to take adverse action, as
18
required by M.G.L. c. 93 60
19
20
e.
Massachusetts CORI Class: All persons in Massachusetts against whom Defendants
21
Uber and/or Rasier took adverse employment action on or after _____, 2012, and
22
about whom Defendants procured Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI)
23
and (1) to whom such CORI was not provided; (2) to whom no CORI policy was
24
provided; and/or (3) to whom no information was provided concerning the process for
25
correcting a criminal record.
26
27
28
29
30
31
58.
Excluded from each of the above Classes are Defendants, including any entity in which
Defendants have a controlling interest, is a parent or subsidiary, or which is controlled by Defendants,

9
as well as the officers, directors, affiliates, legal representatives, predecessors, successors, and assigns
of Defendants. Also excluded are the judges and court personnel in this case and any members of their
immediate families.
4
5
6
59.
Plaintiff reserves the right to amend or modify the Class definitions with greater
specificity or division into subclasses after having had an opportunity to conduct discovery.
60.
Numerosity. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). Each Class is so numerous that joinder of all
members is unfeasible. The precise number of members of each Class cannot be determined without
discovery, but clearly each has numerous members.
61.
Commonality and Predominance. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2) and (b)(3). There are
10
questions of law and fact common to each Class, which predominate over any questions affecting
11
only individual members of each respective Class. These common questions of law and fact include,
12
without limitation:
13
d.
Whether Defendants conduct described herein violated the FCRA;
14
e.
Whether Defendants procured or caused to be procured consumer reports to

investigate prospective and/or current employees;
15
16
f.
Whether Defendants Uber and Rasier violated the FCRA by failing to provide notice
17
to members of the FCRA Classes with a clear and conspicuous disclosure that
18
Defendants would procure a consumer report for employment purposes,
19
g.
disclosure;
20
21
h.
Whether Defendants procured the written authorization of Plaintiff and other Class
members prior to obtaining consumer reports concerning them;
22
23
Whether Defendants provide such disclosure in a document that consists solely of that
i.
Whether Defendants have taken adverse employment action based upon information
24
contained within an applicants or employees consumer report without providing a
25
copy of such report to the applicant or employee;
26
j.
Whether Defendants violated the FCRA by failing to provide Plaintiff and other
27
putative Class members, prior to taking adverse action, with notice that adverse action
28
would be taken in whole or in part based on a consumer report;
29
30
31
10
k.
Whether Defendants have taken adverse employment action based upon information
contained within an applicants or employees consumer report without providing the
applicant or employee with a written description of their rights under 15 U.S.C.
1681;
l.
Whether Defendants violated the CCRAA;
m.
Whether Defendants violated the MCRA;
n.
Whether Defendants acted in deliberate or reckless disregard of their obligations and
the rights of Plaintiff and other Class members under the FCRA, the CCRAA, and/or
the MCRA; and
10
o.
members are entitled.
11
12
The nature of the relief, including equitable relief, to which Plaintiff and other Class
62.
Typicality. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3). Plaintiffs claims are typical of the claims of the
13
Classes he seeks to represent. Plaintiff and all Class members were exposed to uniform practices and
14
sustained injuries arising out of and caused by Defendants unlawful conduct.
15
63.
Adequacy of Representation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). Plaintiff will fairly and
16
adequately represent and protect the interests of the members of the Classes. Further, Plaintiffs
17
counsel is competent and experienced in litigating class actions.
18
64.
Superiority of Class Action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). A class action is superior to
19
other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this action since joinder of all Class
20
members is impracticable and will waste judicial resources. Moreover, the adjudication of this
21
controversy through a class action will avoid the possibility of inconsistent and potentially conflicting
22
outcomes. Finally, there will be no difficulty in managing this action as a class action.
23
65.
Injunctive and Declaratory Relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2). Defendants actions have
24
been uniform as to all members of each Class. Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds that
25
apply generally to each Class, so that final injunctive relief or declaratory relief is appropriate with
26
respect to each Class as a whole.
27
28
29
30
31
11
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
1
2
Violation of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681b(b)
(Against Uber and Rasier on behalf of Plaintiff and the FCRA Classes)
66.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference and re-alleges the preceding paragraphs.
67.
Defendants used a consumer report, as defined by the FCRA, to take adverse
6
7
employment action against Plaintiff and other members of the putative FCRA Classes.
68.
Defendants violated the FCRA by failing to acquire from Plaintiff and Class members
proper authorization prior to conducting the background check and/or did not utilize an authorization
with the requisite statutory requirements.
10
69.
Defendants violated the FCRA by failing to provide notice to Plaintiff and other Class
11
members with a conspicuous disclosure that Defendants would procure a consumer report for
12
employment purposes, in a document that consists solely of the disclosure, as required by 15 U.S.C.
13
1681b(b)(2)(A).
14
70.
Defendants further violated the FCRA by failing to provide Plaintiff and other
15
putative Class members, prior to taking adverse action, with notice that adverse action would be
16
taken in whole or in part based on a consumer report.
17
71.
Defendants violated the FCRA by taking adverse employment action based upon
18
information contained within applicants and/or employees consumer reports without providing
19
copies of such report to the applicants or employees.
20
72.
The foregoing violations were willful. Defendants acted in deliberate or reckless
21
disregard of their obligations and the rights of Plaintiff and other Class members under 15 U.S.C.
22
1681b(b)(3)(A). The willfulness of Defendants conduct is reflected by, among other things, the
23
following facts:
24
a.
Based on the plain language of the statute, legal advice provided by its own general
25
counsel, or outside employment counsel, and published FTC guidance, Defendants
26
knew or should have known that its failure to provide compliant pre-adverse actions
27
notice was unlawful;
28
29
30
31
12
b.
Based on published FTC guidance, Defendants knew or should have known that its
choice to consider itself exempt from the provisions of the FCRA because they
believe themselves to utilize independent contractors and not employees was
unlawful;
c.
Defendants could have complied with the statutory duty to provide a pre-adverse
action notice either by sending the notice directly to the affected consumer job
applicant, or by contracting with Hirease to do so on its behalf;
d.
so, Defendants failed to adopt any measure or mechanism which would have provided
the required notice to Plaintiff and the Class.
10
11
Despite the clear notice of the law, full ability to comply, and ample opportunity to do
73.
Plaintiff and other members of the FCRA Classes are entitled to actual damages or
12
statutory damages of not less than $100.00 and not more than $1,000.00 for each and every one of
13
these violations, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681n(a)(1)(A).
14
15
74.
Plaintiff and other members of the FCRA Classes are entitled to recover their costs
and attorneys fees, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681n(a)(3).
16
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
17
18
Violation of the CCRAA, Cal. Civ. Code 1785.1 et seq.
19
(Against Uber and Rasier by Plaintiff and the CCRAA Class)
20
75.
21
76.
Defendants used a consumer credit report as defined in Cal. Civ. Code 1785.3 to
22
23
take adverse employment action against Plaintiff and other members of the CCRAA Class.
77.
Defendants violated the CCRAA by failing to provide written notice to Plaintiff and
24
other members of the CCRAA Class, prior to requesting such consumer credit reports, that complied
25
with Cal. Civ. Code 1785.20.5 by informing Plaintiff and other members of the CCRAA Class of the
26
specific basis under subdivision (a) of Section 1024.5 of the Labor Code for use of the reports,
27
informing them of the source of the reports, and including a box that such persons could check off to
28
receive copies of such reports.
29
30
31
13
1
2
78.
disregard of their obligations and the rights of Plaintiff and other Class members under the CCRAA.
79.
a.
Plaintiff and other members of the CCRAA Class are entitled to:
Any actual damages sustained by Plaintiff and other Class members as a result of the
failure;
5
6
b.
Punitive damages of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than five
thousand dollars ($5,000) for each violation as the Court deems proper;
7
8
c.
Injunctive relief requiring Defendants to comply with the FCRA and CCRAA; and
d.
Costs and reasonable attorneys fees.
10
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
11
Violation of the MCRA M.G.L c. 93 50 et seq.
12
(Against all Defendants by Plaintiff and the Massachusetts MCRA Class)
13
14
80.
15
81.
Defendants used a consumer report as defined by the MCRA to take adverse
16
17
employment action against Plaintiff and other members of the Putative Class.
82.
Defendants violated the MCRA by failing to advise Plaintiff and the Members of the
18
MCRA Class of the statutorily required rights in M.G.L. c. 93 62 in their adverse action notice,
19
including the right to assistance interpreting consumer reports.
20
21
22
83.
Hirease failed to deliver a copy of the Report to Plaintiff and other members of the
MCRA Class as required by M.G.L. c. 93 60.

84.
23
disregard of their obligations and the rights of Plaintiff and other Class members under M.G.L. c. 93
24
50 et seq.
25
85.
26
a.
29
30
31
Any actual damages sustained by Plaintiff and other Class members as a result of the
failure;
27
28
Plaintiff and the MCRA Class Members are entitled to:
b.
Such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow;

14
c.
court; and
2
3
The costs of this action together with reasonable attorneys fees as determined by the
d.
Treble damages and attorney fees pursuant to M.G.L. c.93 68, which incorporates
M.G.L. c.93A 2 and 11.
4
5
6
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Massachusetts CORI Requirements, M.G.L. c. 6 171A et seq.
(Against Uber and Rasier by Plaintiff and the Massachusetts CORI Class)
86.
10
87.
On information and belief, Defendants Uber and Raiser annually conduct 5 or more
11
criminal background investigations, and therefore are required to maintain a written criminal
12
offender record information policy providing that . . . [they] will: (i) notify the applicant of the
13
potential adverse decision based on the criminal offender record information; (ii) provide a copy of
14
the criminal offender record information and the policy to the applicant; and (iii) provide information
15
concerning the process for correcting a criminal record. M.G.L. c.6 171A.
16
17
18
19
20
88.
Defendants Uber and Rasier violated Massachusetts law by failing to maintain and to
provide a CORI policy.

89.
Defendants Uber and Rasier violated Massachusetts law by failing to provide to
applicants information concerning the process for correcting a criminal record.

90.
Defendants Uber and Rasier violated Massachusetts law by failing to provide Plaintiff
21
and other members of the CORI Class with CORI in Defendants possession on which they relied to
22
take adverse employment actions against Plaintiff and other members of the CORI Class.
23
91.
24
a.
b.
29
30
31
exemplary damages of not less than one hundred and not more than one thousand
dollars for each violation; and
27
28
Any actual damages sustained by Plaintiff and other Class members as a result of
Defendants failures;
25
26
Plaintiff and the CORI Class Members are entitled to:
c.
costs and reasonable attorneys fees.

15
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and Class members, prays for relief as follows:
A.
For an order that this action may be maintained as a class action under Rule 23 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that each of the above-described classes be certified, that
Plaintiff be appointed Class representative, and that Plaintiffs counsel be appointed as counsel for the
Class;
B.
6
7
determined at trial;
C.
8
9
For an order requiring Defendants to pay actual damages in an amount to be
For an award of statutory damages on the First Cause of Action in an amount not
less than $100 and not more than $1,000 per violation;
D.
10
For an award of punitive damages of not less than $100 nor more than $5,000 per
11
violation on the Second Cause of Action, and in an amount to be determined at trial on the Third
12
Cause of Action;
13
E.
14
For an award of exemplary damages in an amount of not less than $100 and not
more than $1,000 per violation on the Fourth Cause of Action;

F.
15
For an order prohibiting Defendant from engaging in the misconduct described
16
herein and requiring Defendants to provide proper disclosures and information as required under 15
17
U.S.C. 1681b(b)(2) and 1681b(b)(3) and under the CCRAA and MCRA;
18
G.
For an award of attorneys fees;
19
H.
For an award of the costs of suit incurred herein, including expert witness fees;
20
I.
For an award of interest, including prejudgment interest, at the legal rate; and
21
J.
For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
22
///
23
24
///
25
26
///
27
28
29
30
31
///
16
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1
2
Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all claims so triable.
3
4
5
Dated: November 24, 2014
Respectfully submitted,
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Tina Wolfson
Robert Ahdoot
Theodore W. Maya
Bradley K. King
16 Palm Ave.,
West Hollywood, California 90069
Tel: 310-474-9111
Facsimile: 310-474-8585
Counsel for Plaintiff
ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
17

Uber Fair Credit Class Action

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Uber Fair Credit Class Action

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JS 44 (Rev.

12/12) cand rev (1/15/13)

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1-1 Filed11/24/14 Page1 of 2

CIVIL COVER SHEET

ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; RASIER, LLC; HIREASE, LLC; and

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number)

(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

Attorneys (If Known)

Tina Wolfson, AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only)

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only)

Citizen of Another State

Incorporated and Principal Place

(For Diversity Cases Only)

625 Drug Related Seizure

and One Box for Defendant)

FEDERAL TAX SUITS

375 False Claims Act

V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:

Violations of Federal Consumer Reporting Agencies Act

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

/s/ Tina Wolfson

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/12)

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1-1 Filed11/24/14 Page2 of 2

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Origin. Place an "X" in one of the six boxes.

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page1 of 18

TINA WOLFSON, SBN 174806

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED, individually and on Case No. 14-5200

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; RASIER, LLC;

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT, NO. 14-5200

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page2 of 18

and do, conduct substantial business in California.

Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(a)(1), because a

Defendants Uber and Rasiers offices here.

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page3 of 18

appropriate to assign this action to the San Francisco Division.

Plaintiff ABDUL KADIR MOHAMED is an individual and a resident of Boston,

Defendant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. is a company that conducts business

thus liable for the damages suffered by Plaintiff.

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page4 of 18

To protect employees, FCRA, CCRAA, and MCRA impose certain strictures on

Uber and Rasier make use of such information in hiring decisions.

manner that is fair and equitable to the consumer . . . 15 U.S.C. 1681(b).

A copy of the consumer report;

A reasonable opportunity to dispute the information before rendering the

See MCRA, M.G.L. c. 93 62.

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page5 of 18

adverse action notice and the adverse action notice.)

The pre-adverse action notice requirement is unqualified. Employers must comply

Credit Reporting Act (July 2011) p. 53.

Advisory Opinion to Allison (02-23-98) available at www.http://www.ftc.gov/policy/advisory-

opinions/advisory-opinion-allison-02-23-98 (last viewed Oct. 25, 2014).

Case3:14-cv-05200 Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page6 of 18