July 30 (Reuters) - A federal judge in Philadelphia on

Tuesday dismissed a long-running lawsuit accusing Uber

Technologies ( UBER ) of misclassifying drivers as independent

contractors rather than its employees, saying a third trial

would be futile after two separate juries deadlocked.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson comes

after a pair of six-day trials in March and June in which jurors

could not agree on whether Uber ( UBER ) exerted enough control over

drivers for luxury service UberBLACK in Philadelphia to be

considered their employer under federal wage law.

Uber ( UBER ) has faced scores of similar lawsuits. Filed by three

drivers in 2016 on behalf of a class of potentially hundreds of

others, the proposed class action was at one time seen as an

important bellwether.

Baylson in one of the first decisions of its kind in 2018

said the drivers were not Uber's ( UBER ) employees under the federal

Fair Labor Standards Act. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

reversed him two years later, paving the way for the case to go

to trial.

On Tuesday, Baylson said the plaintiffs had not shown that

they could convince a third jury to rule in their favor, and

that granting them another trial would waste the court's

resources.

"No single litigant has the right to continuously monopolize

a district court's docket in this manner," wrote Baylson, an

appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush.

Uber ( UBER ) did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Shannon Liss-Riordan, who represents the plaintiffs and tens

of thousands of other Uber ( UBER ) and Lyft drivers in similar cases

around the country, said she planned to appeal the decision. She

noted that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2020 ruled that

Uber ( UBER ) drivers are the company's employees under state

unemployment insurance law.

"It makes no sense that Uber ( UBER ) drivers are employees in

Pennsylvania for purposes of unemployment but not for wages. The

court was unfortunately very mistaken about the law here,"

Liss-Riordan said in an email.

Like many other cases against Uber ( UBER ), the lawsuit claims that

drivers were owed the minimum wage and overtime pay. Employees

are entitled to many rights not extended to independent

contractors and can cost companies up to 30% more, according to

several studies.

Despite the barrage of lawsuits against Uber ( UBER ) and other

app-based services, few have yielded final rulings on how gig

workers should be classified. Many cases have been sent to

private arbitration or settled.

And the industry has won several victories, including a

California Supreme Court ruling last week upholding a ballot

measure that allows app-based drivers to be treated as

independent contractors.

Baylson on Tuesday credited "the herculean efforts of

plaintiffs' counsel" in litigating the Philadelphia case for

eight years, but said he had an obligation to manage the court's

docket.

"As this case now presents the prospect of an endless loop

of deadlocked juries, swift resolution is warranted," he wrote.

The case is Razak v. Uber ( UBER ), U.S. District Court for the

Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 2:16-cv-00573.

For the plaintiffs: Shannon Liss-Riordan and Jeremy Abay of

Lichten & Liss-Riordan

For Uber ( UBER ): Christian Angotti of Littler Mendelson; Heather

Richardson of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher

Read more:

U.S. judge says Uber ( UBER ) drivers are not company's employees

Worker advocates tell 3rd Circuit that drivers are Uber's ( UBER )

employees

3rd Circuit will be first appeal court to consider

classification of Uber ( UBER ) drivers

U.S. Supreme Court rejects Uber ( UBER ) bid to avoid driver pay

lawsuit

Penn. Supreme Court says Uber ( UBER ) driver is employee entitled to

unemployment benefits

California top court upholds ballot measure treating Uber ( UBER ),

Lyft drivers as independent contractors