Fare Technologies LLC v. Lyft, Inc.
- Lin
- 3:23-cv-04935
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Fare Technologies v. Lyft, Judge Lin dismissed the case without prejudice because Fare failed to retain counsel and prosecute it.
Fare Technologies LLC’s case was dismissed without prejudice, while judgment was ordered in favor of Lyft, Inc.
What happened
Fare Technologies LLC’s counsel withdrew, and the company was warned that corporations cannot appear in federal court without lawyers. The court gave Fare a deadline to hire new counsel, but Fare did not do so despite multiple warnings.
The court dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). It also directed that judgment be entered in Lyft’s favor and that the case be closed.
Judge Rita F. Lin issued the order in Fare Technologies LLC v. Lyft, Inc. on October 29, 2024.
The detailed version
- Fare Technologies LLC v. Lyft, Inc. · No. 3:23-cv-04935
- Lin
- Oct. 29, 2024
Background
Fare Technologies LLC’s counsel had withdrawn ten months before the order, then reappeared for the limited purposes of settlement and dismissal. On July 17, 2024, counsel stated an intention to withdraw again. Fare had notice that it needed to retain new counsel because corporations may not appear in federal court without counsel.
On August 21, 2024, the court set September 20, 2024, as the deadline for Fare to retain new counsel. The court warned that failing to do so could lead to dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Fare did not retain counsel despite multiple warnings.
Ruling
Judge Rita F. Lin dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b). The court also ordered that judgment be entered in Lyft’s favor and that the case be closed. The order did not decide the underlying claims between Fare and Lyft.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.