Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Uber board directors saw key documents on an acquisition as part of Alphabet’s lawsuit

Uber has said Alphabet trade secrets were never transferred to its servers.

A new court filing details which individuals have viewed a key document that Alphabet argues will prove Uber knew it was inheriting Alphabet’s technology when it acquired Otto.

Current Uber board member Arianna Huffington and former board member Bill Gurley are among those who have seen the report, according to Friday’s filing.

Uber came under scrutiny after it acquired self-driving trucking startup Otto, a business founded by Anthony Levandowski, who previously led Alphabet’s autonomous vehicle efforts. Alphabet claims Levandowski stole 14,000 proprietary files before leaving to start Otto and is suing Uber over allegations the ride-hailing startup misappropriated that technology.

The lawsuit coincides with allegations of rampant sexual harassment at the company and revelations of questionable legal practices, which have prompted founding CEO Travis Kalanick to resign.

As part of Uber’s acquisition of Otto, it commissioned a due diligence report, which could reveal if Uber was aware of any Alphabet technology Levandowski may have had in his possession. Alphabet has been pushing for months for Uber to release the report, but Uber has objected to a court order to do so.

Now Uber has filed a document detailing who has seen the due diligence report. Alphabet has argued that the due diligence report would have revealed to Uber that Otto possessed stolen technology, which could mean Uber knowingly allowed stolen technology to come over with the acquisition.

But Uber has said the 14,000 files never touched its servers.

Friday’s court filing does not say when the individuals would have seen the due diligence report. The filing says the individuals would have seen the report minus exhibits, which means they would have seen descriptions of what the due diligence process found when it examined Otto but not necessarily photos of devices or other materials that illustrate findings.

Here is the full list of who saw the report:

The following individuals received copies of the due diligence report without exhibits: Tara Allport and Wendy Wu of Stroz Friedberg; four attorneys at Paul Weiss (who received it from then-Uber board member Bill Gurley); former Uber board member Bill Gurley (who received it from Uber in-house counsel Angela Padilla); former Uber board member David Bonderman (who received it from Uber’s in-house counsel; Mr. Bonderman subsequently shredded his copy); Uber board member Arianna Huffington (who received it from Uber’s inhouse counsel); Nicole Bartow, Aaron Bergstrom, Andrew Glickman, Todd Hamblet, Christian Lymn, Angela Padilla, Justin Suhr, Robert Wu, and Salle Yoo of Uber’s internal Legal Team (Angela Padilla and Justin Suhr received it from Morrison & Foerster and from there it was distributed to the above Uber in-house attorneys); Adam Bentley of Uber (who received it from O’Melveny & Myers); John Gardner of Donahue Fitzgerald (who received it from Stroz Friedberg); Eric Amdursky of O’Melveny & Myers (who received it from Stroz Friedberg); and Anthony Levandowski and Lior Ron.


This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh