, No. 15-262 (collectively, the "Rule 23(d) Order"). The Rule 23(d) Order, which is currently up on appeal in the Ninth Circuit, (1) enjoins Uber from sending out arbitration agreements to the class certified in O'Connor ; and (2) requires Uber to send out a revised cover letter and arbitration agreement to putative class members in Yucesoy and In Re Uber FCRA. Judge Baylson disagreed with Uber and found that the language of the Arbitration provision in the December 2015 TSA "contains a conspicuous opt-out provision, which allows for the resolution of disputes between Drivers and Uber in a court of law." Because Plaintiffs complied with the opt-out procedure, there was no agreement to arbitrate issues of arbitrability. Uber's second argument relied on Judge Chen's Order rendering the Arbitration Provision a nullity and claimed that the Court must disregard the December 2015 TSA and Driver Addendum in favor of the November 2014 and April 2015 Agreements that contained survival clauses.