Uber lawyers get extra time to seek disqualification of opposing counsel in antitrust case

In their first big move after being brought on to defend Uber Technologies Inc. in an antitrust suit, a team of attorneys at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, led by Theodore Boutrous Jr., argued opposing counsel at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP should be disqualified for the firm's prior work with the ridesharing company.

"Good cause exists for granting Uber's motion," Boutrous wrote. "Quinn Emanuel, during its long tenure as Uber's counsel, represented Uber in matters substantially related to this one and, as a result, 'has obtained confidential information material to' its current representation of SCI [Innovations Inc.]"

U.S. District Judge Joseph Spero late Tuesday extended Uber's deadline to respond to SCI's initial complaint until Jan. 17 to allow further time to seek to disqualify plaintiffs' attorneys. SC Innovations, Inc. v. Uber Technologies Inc., 18-CV07440 (N.D. Cal., filed Dec. 11, 2018).

The San Francisco federal judge ordered SC Innovations, which is a successor to ride-hailing app Sidecar, to respond to Uber's administrative motion by Friday.

Quinn Emanuel has served as counsel of record for Uber in roughly 20 lawsuits in federal and state courts, according to Boutrous' motion.

The firm has also counseled Uber on a "broad array of legal matters -- including unfair competition (specifically as it relates to pricing) and antitrust," he added.

The defense informed opposing counsel last month that it believed there was a conflict of interest and requested an explanation "on what basis Quinn believes, if it does believe, that it can act as counsel against Uber in this case in light of its prior representations of Uber," according to an email cited in the motion.

Plaintiffs' attorneys responded in the email that Uber's tentative conclusion was "incorrect" and that prior matters in which their firm represented the company were "not substantially related to this case."

Claude Stern and Ethan Glass of Quinn Emanuel did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

SC Innovation's lawsuit alleged Uber maintains a monopoly, stole Sidecar's business model and intentionally sustained losses to force competitors out of the market.