UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. SIMON & SIMON P.C. et al

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 2:25-cv-05365-MAK Document 242 Filed 10/13/26 Page1of1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ef al. : CIVIL ACTION
v. : NO. 25-5365

SIMON & SIMON P.C., MARC
SIMON, CLIFTON BURT, PREMIER
PAIN & REHAB CENTER, PC,
ETHEL HARVEY, DANIEL
PICCILLO, PHILADELPHIA SPINE
ASSOCIATES, LLC, LANCE YARUS

ORDER
AND NOW, this 13"" day of October 2026, upon studying Simon & Simon P.C. and Mare

Simon’s Motion for partial summary judgment (ECF 213) challenging Uber Technologies, Inc.’s
standing to proceed on its racketeering theory based upon their understanding Uber’s insurer
(rather than Uber) paid the underlying fees, settlements, and judgments, Uber’s Opposition (ECF
230), Reply (ECF 234), and for reasons in today’s accompanying Memorandum, it is ORDERED
Simon & Simon P.C. and Mare Simon’s Motion for partial summary judgment (ECF 213) is

DENIED.

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO