Skip to content
Survivors Rights may help connect you with an attorney who can pursue justice and compensation. Learn more about your legal options and the lawsuits against Uber for failing to ensure rider safety.
When Uber’s app launched in 2010, it disrupted the traditional taxi industry. Seemingly overnight, getting from point A to point B in an urban environment without a car was more accessible, affordable, and convenient. No more waving down taxis, carrying cash, or waiting endlessly for a ride, only to be picked up by an unfriendly driver. With a few taps, you could get picked up anywhere, anytime. However, as Uber skyrocketed in popularity, a disturbing reality emerged: passenger safety was an afterthought.
For far too many riders, an Uber ride turned into a nightmare. Reports of sexual assaults by Uber drivers started piling up. It became apparent that Uber’s background check process and safety policies were woefully insufficient.
If you or someone you love was assaulted by an Uber driver, you may be eligible for compensation and legal justice.
This guide breaks down everything survivors need to know, including what Uber did (or didn’t do), what lawsuits are being filed, and how to take the first step toward accountability.
Uber has published three U.S. Safety Reports, covering 2017–18, 2019–20, and 2021–22. Across those six years, the company disclosed a staggering 12,522 reports of sexual assault involving Uber rides.
To put that number into perspective: in the second financial quarter (Q2) of 2020 alone, Uber’s rides dropped by 75% due to the COVID pandemic. So that total (12,000+ sexual assaults) occurred during a period when far fewer people were even using the service.
Still think it’s rare? Picture a sold-out concert at a mid-sized arena, with every single seat occupied. Now imagine every person in that crowd is a survivor of an Uber sexual assault. Suddenly, the problem becomes impossible to ignore.
Uber’s own data shows that every day, an average of 5–6 new sexual assault reports occur during rides on its platform. An August 2025 New York Times investigation, which analyzed unsealed court documents, revealed that the scope of sexual misconduct is much greater than Uber’s public-facing safety reports. The documents show the company has received more than 400,000 incident reports from 2017–2022. That averages to one sexual misconduct incident every eight minutes.
Fortunately, survivors have bravely come forward to hold Uber accountable.
If you are a survivor, it’s not too late to either join the MDL or the California JCCP, or to file an individual lawsuit. Speaking to an attorney who specializes in rideshare assault cases can help you understand which path is right for you.
Uber is planning to tighten its background screening policies to permanently exclude individuals convicted of violent felonies, sexual offenses, and child or elder abuse from driving on its platform after investigations revealed its previous seven-year cutoff allowed drivers with serious criminal histories in many states, a change that comes as the company faces heightened scrutiny and litigation over rider safety. [SOURCE: NEW YORK TIMES]
A Yolo County, CA jury convicted an Uber driver of sexually assaulting a UC Davis student after a late night ride home, as national attention remains focused on Uber following the first federal jury verdict awarding $8.5 million to a survivor in a landmark civil trial. [SOURCE: ABC10]
A federal jury in Arizona awarded $8.5 million to a passenger who said she was sexually assaulted by an Uber driver, marking the first bellwether verdict among thousands of consolidated Uber sexual assault lawsuits. The jury found the driver acted as Uber’s agent, holding the company liable and creating a potential benchmark for future cases. [LEARN MORE]
A federal jury in Phoenix is deliberating in the first bellwether trial arising from the nationwide Uber sexual assault litigation, a closely watched case that could influence thousands of pending claims. The lawsuit alleges that Uber failed to protect a young woman who was sexually assaulted by her driver during a late-night ride in 2023, and that the company’s app lacked basic safety safeguards such as automatic recording and a women-preferred driver option. Jurors are weighing whether Uber was negligent, whether its app was defectively designed, and whether the driver acted as Uber’s apparent agent. The plaintiff is seeking $24 million in compensatory damages for long-term psychological harm and approximately $120 million in punitive damages, arguing a substantial verdict is necessary to force meaningful safety changes. The outcome could shape future trials, settlement strategy, and expectations for rideshare safety nationwide. [LEARN MORE]
A federal judge overseeing the Uber passenger sexual assault multidistrict litigation has refused Uber’s request to declare a mistrial in the first federal bellwether case, allowing the landmark trial to proceed toward a jury verdict. The ruling rejected arguments that jurors were improperly influenced, reinforcing the court’s position that the evidence presented, including statistical context about reported sexual assaults on the platform, is appropriate for jury consideration. The decision is a significant procedural setback for Uber and keeps a closely watched test case moving forward, with potential implications for thousands of federal and state lawsuits alleging the company failed to protect riders from foreseeable sexual assault risks. [LEARN MORE]
In the first Uber sexual assault lawsuit to reach a federal jury, the company defended its nonprofit safety partnerships and internal prevention efforts as survivors challenged whether those measures meaningfully reduced assaults on the platform. Testimony highlighted Uber’s spending on advocacy collaborations, internal marketing strategies targeting women riders, delayed safety feature rollouts, and ongoing criticism over driver screening practices. [READ MORE]
In deposition footage played for jurors in the first federal Uber sexual assault case to reach trial, Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi repeatedly said he did not know or could not remember basic information about reported sexual assaults on the platform. Questioned about rising assault reports, risk factors tied to late night rides and intoxicated passengers, and whether Uber tracks or discloses that data, Khosrowshahi offered little substantive detail. The testimony comes as the plaintiff alleges Uber failed to implement reasonable safety measures that could have prevented her assault, raising broader questions about corporate oversight, transparency, and accountability in rideshare safety.
Click to learn more.
Federal jurors are hearing evidence in the first Uber sexual assault case to go to trial, including internal messages showing executives discussed suppressing negative press while acknowledging a growing number of sexual assault allegations involving drivers. A couple of gems from Uber’s global safety communications director, Andrew Hasbun in 2018:
“In many cases, we can and should squash stories.”
“Kill stories when possible and mitigate the impact on our reputation.”
Click to learn more.
Federal authorities in Houston have charged four Uber drivers in connection with alleged violent sexual assaults involving passengers, with investigators warning there may be additional victims who have not yet come forward. According to the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice, the men are accused of abusing their position as rideshare drivers by kidnapping victims, driving them to unintended locations, or preventing them from exiting the vehicle, in some cases allegedly using force or strangulation. One suspect remains at large, and all of the drivers’ Uber accounts were reportedly deactivated after the incidents were reported. The cases are part of Operation Lighthouse, a federal initiative focused on addressing sexual abuse in rideshare settings, and authorities are urging anyone with information to contact the FBI. [SOURCE: Click2Houston]
The first bellwether trial in Uber’s nationwide sexual assault litigation is underway in Phoenix, where jurors are weighing claims that the company failed to prevent a driver from raping a passenger. The case is being closely watched because it could influence the outcome of more than 3,000 similar lawsuits pending against the rideshare giant. [LEARN MORE]
A New York Times investigation revealed that Uber knowingly approved drivers with violent criminal histories under a background check system designed to reduce costs and speed onboarding, even as the company received reports of sexual assault or misconduct nearly every eight minutes in the United States. Consumer advocates say internal documents show Uber executives were aware of the system’s deficiencies but declined to adopt stronger protections, exposing passengers, particularly those who were intoxicated, asleep, or otherwise vulnerable to serious harm. [SOURCE: New York Times]
A Bakersfield Uber driver has been charged with raping an unconscious passenger after allegedly continuing to drive her around Ventura County instead of taking her home. [SOURCE: Bakersfield Now]
An Uber driver in Tempe has been arrested after police say he sexually assaulted a female passenger during a ride, forcing her to repeatedly tell him to stop and attempt to escape while the vehicle was still moving. The driver allegedly exposed himself, threw money at the victim, and fled the scene before later turning himself in and admitting to the assault. The case comes amid thousands of lawsuits nationwide accusing Uber of failing to protect riders, as well as ongoing scrutiny of the company’s safety practices and handling of sexual assault reports. [SOURCE: FOX 10 Phoenix]
Uber has asked a federal judge in the Northern District of California to postpone a scheduled bellwether trial in the nationwide sexual assault multidistrict litigation, arguing that a recent advertising campaign related to the lawsuits could unfairly influence potential jurors. The company claims the ads rely on misleading statistics about sexual assault reports on the platform and could prejudice the jury pool ahead of the test trial, which is intended to help guide thousands of similar cases. The motion comes as preparations for the first bellwether trial continue and as the broader litigation over Uber’s safety practices and handling of sexual assault reports moves forward.
In one of the most disturbing cases of rideshare driver assault, an Indianapolis Uber driver, Francisco Valadez, received a 45-year sentence after admitting he killed passenger Chanti Dixon during an attempted sexual assault in 2024. According to court records, Valadez attacked Dixon in the backseat of his vehicle, shot her, and was later linked to the crime through a police investigation. [SOURCE: Hoodline.com]
A 61-year-old Uber driver, Clifford Partin, was arrested in Richmond, Kentucky, after a woman reported that she lost consciousness during an Uber ride on August 30 and later awoke in a parked car at the Richmond Centre, leading her to seek medical care and report the assault. Investigators say GPS data, surveillance footage, and a subsequent interview in which Partin admitted to the assault supported her account. He now faces charges, including first-degree rape incapable of consent. [SOURCE: LEX18.com]
Federal authorities arrested a 29-year-old Uber driver accused of sexually assaulting a passenger after she reported that he drove off-route, coerced her, and assaulted her behind a building at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center. Investigators say the woman, who appeared disoriented when found, identified the driver through the rideshare app, and police later located and arrested him in District Heights. The arrest came just weeks after Baltimore Police had sought the same driver for questioning in an unrelated homicide. He now faces federal sexual abuse charges that carry a potential life sentence. [SOURCE: Baltimore Sun]
A University of Utah student reported that an Uber driver assaulted her on campus after picking her up for a ride near Research Park, leading to the driver’s arrest and an active police investigation. According to the probable cause statement, the student escaped the vehicle and contacted a friend before reporting the incident, and authorities say they have “substantial evidence.” Uber immediately removed the driver from the platform and stated it is assisting law enforcement. [SOURCE: Salt Lake Tribune]
A recent case in North Texas highlights ongoing risks for minors in rideshare vehicles. A 12-year-old girl in Frisco was assaulted by her Uber Health driver, Robert Johnson III during what should have been a safe medical transport arranged by a pediatric facility. After Johnson was convicted, the child’s mother spoke publicly to raise awareness, saying her daughter “doesn’t want this to happen to anyone else.”
Although minors are not supposed to ride alone under Uber’s own policies, the family believed the healthcare-arranged trip was safe. Safety advocates say Uber’s public assault statistics may paint an incomplete picture, and lawmakers continue pushing for stronger reporting requirements and child protection measures.
The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) is searching for 33-year-old rideshare driver Lemolineaux Bain, accused of sexually assaulting a 21-year-old woman after she requested an Uber ride home following a night out with friends. According to MCSO, the woman’s parents interrupted the assault after the driver brought her home, prompting Bain to flee before law enforcement could question him. Investigators believe there may be additional victims and urge anyone with information to contact the Sheriff’s Office or provide anonymous tips through the 602-876-TIPS hotline.
WFLA News Channel 8 reports that an Uber driver in Miami has been charged with sexually assaulting a tourist who passed out in his car after allegedly being drugged. Rafael Martinez, 42, was arrested on October 21 and booked into Miami-Dade County Jail on one count of sexual battery of a physically helpless victim.
According to investigators, the incident occurred on January 25, 2024, when the victim, visiting from out of town, was drinking at a hotel bar with a friend. After her friend left, a man later identified as Martinez approached her outside and offered a ride, claiming he would log it into the Uber app afterward. The victim entered his car and accepted an open bottle of vitamin water from him. She soon began feeling dizzy and passed out.
The victim briefly awoke to find Martinez giving her a shot of alcohol before blacking out again. She later woke up naked in an unfamiliar apartment. Surveillance video confirmed she was brought to the Park Place by the Bay apartment complex with Martinez that night.
The victim managed to escape and report the assault. DNA from her rape kit matched Martinez, leading to his arrest more than a year later. Martinez remains in custody without bond.
Bloomberg Law reports that the legal team for a Florida woman who was sexually assaulted by her Uber driver in 2021 has accused the company of hiding key evidence about its handling of sexual assault incidents and driver safety practices. Her attorneys allege that Uber misled the court by denying the existence of internal data later revealed in separate California litigation showing thousands of reported assaults on the platform.
The plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe, was attacked by an Uber driver with a lengthy criminal record after being picked up outside a Tampa nightclub. The company has already been sanctioned for discovery violations, and the judge may now allow punitive damages if the court finds Uber engaged in intentional misconduct.
The Daily Journal reports that following a split verdict in the first Uber sexual assault bellwether trial, attorneys for the plaintiff plan to appeal after a San Francisco judge allowed evidence about her past sexual encounters to be presented to jurors. Her attorneys argue that this violated California’s Rape Shield Law, which was designed to protect survivors by keeping such evidence out of civil and criminal trials.
Why would a plaintiff’s past sexual history be a factor in deciding whether Uber is responsible for an assault? The judge reportedly allowed the defense to refer to certain events as “traumatic incidents,” which the plaintiff’s team says confused the jury and blurred the line between the survivor’s past experiences and the attack involving the Uber driver.
The first Uber sexual assault trial ended with a split verdict, with jurors finding Uber negligent but not legally responsible for damages. Despite the setback, the decision provides plaintiffs’ attorneys with valuable lessons on how to strengthen arguments and better frame causation in the many trials still to come.
Uber argued that the driver had passed background checks and carried strong rider ratings, portraying the assault as an unforeseeable criminal act. Plaintiffs’ attorneys pressed for Uber to be held to the same “common carrier” standard as buses and airlines, but jurors ultimately were not persuaded that Uber’s failures were a substantial factor in the attack. (Read our analysis of the trial here.)
This initial trial is only the beginning. Hundreds of similar claims are set for trial in California state court, while thousands more are moving forward in federal multi-district litigation before Judge Charles Breyer. Future cases will likely revisit these same arguments with sharper strategies, leaving the door open for survivors to achieve accountability.
The very first Uber driver sexual assault trial is now in the hands of the jury. Today, a San Francisco jury began deliberating on a verdict that could influence outcomes across coordinated Uber assault litigation, with hundreds of California trials hanging in the balance of this litigation, and a few thousand similar federal trails scheduled for early next year. The San Francisco Superior Court test trial will decide whether Uber can be held liable for a rider’s alleged sexual assault by a driver. In closing statements, the plaintiff argued Uber prioritized rapid growth over safety and asked for nearly $22 million plus punitive damages. Uber said assaults are extremely rare and that it used the highest care with background checks and monitoring. Survivors advocates counter that a recent report by the New York Times reveals over 400,000 instances of sexual misconduct or sexual assault; not exactly a rare occurrence.
A House oversight subcommittee asked Uber to explain how it prevents, tracks, and responds to reports of sexual assault and misconduct on its platform. The request cites news reports that say Uber receives a report of sexual assault or sexual misconduct in the United States almost every eight minutes and that hundreds of thousands of trips from 2017 to 2022 were linked to such reports, far more than previously disclosed. The letter seeks details on policies, data accuracy, and any new measures to protect riders and drivers. It also points to Sami’s Law and a Government Accountability Office report noting that current data does not fully capture the scope of assaults in ridesharing.
Does this really matter for survivors of Uber sexual assault perpetrated by drivers? Maybe. Maybe not. On one hand, more scrutiny can push for clearer reporting, faster responses, and stronger safety tools. That can help survivors document what happened, find support, and pursue accountability through civil or criminal paths. On the other hand, hearings and letters do not guarantee real change. Company policies can take time to update, data can remain incomplete, and individual cases still depend on evidence, local law, and the quality of follow up. If you are a survivor, your best path is to focus on your options now while policymakers debate what comes next.
Two of the first federal bellwether trials in the Uber sexual assault multidistrict litigation (MDL) will now be held in the Western District of North Carolina, even though the MDL is based in Northern California. The move, authorized by Judge Charles Breyer and coordinated with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, is based on Uber’s Terms of Use and a venue transfer statute (28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)). While Judge Breyer will retain authority over the trials, this shift could significantly affect how juries view the evidence, especially in a state with a different cultural and legal climate than San Francisco.
For survivors, this matters because bellwether trials help determine the tone and potential settlement value of thousands of pending lawsuits. Regional jury attitudes, courtroom dynamics, and judicial norms can all influence outcomes. If Uber fares better in North Carolina, it could weaken plaintiffs’ leverage. If the trials result in strong verdicts for survivors, it could pressure Uber into broader accountability. Either way, moving high-stakes trials out of California adds a new layer of uncertainty. For both sides.
As the first Uber sexual assault trial in California state court moves forward, jurors have now heard from former Uber executives and safety staff about internal warnings that were allegedly ignored for years. Internal emails shown during the trial reveal that Uber employees pushed for stronger safety measures, including ride recordings, real-time location sharing, and a women-only ride option, as early as 2014. According to trial testimony, executives delayed those proposals due to legal concerns and fears they might signal the platform was unsafe.
The case involves an 18-year-old woman who says she was assaulted during a 2019 Uber ride to the San Jose airport. Plaintiffs allege Uber severely underreported sexual misconduct, citing internal estimates of up to 95,000 incidents in a single year, far more than what was published in its official safety reports.
Although this trial involves just one survivor, it could influence the broader litigation involving 600 similar claims consolidated in California Superior Court. The outcome may also impact how attorneys approach the separate federal multidistrict litigation (MDL), which now includes over 2,500 lawsuits. The first MDL trial is scheduled for January 2026.
The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit in Northern California accusing Uber and its drivers of widespread violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The suit alleges that Uber routinely refuses rides to people using service animals or using mobility devices, charges cleaning or cancellation fees tied to disabilities, and fails to properly train drivers or enforce policies to accommodate passengers with disabilities. The DOJ is seeking $125 million in damages and changes in Uber’s practices.
What does this have to do with Uber sexual assault lawsuits? Seemingly, nothing directly. Yet’s it’s another example of Uber putting profit and operational convenience ahead of the rights, safety, and dignity of vulnerable users. This lawsuit echoes the concerns in the MDL that Uber has, according to plaintiffs, ignored internal warnings, underreported harms, and avoided implementing protections when doing so might reduce margins or create costs.
The first bellwether trial in California’s state-level Uber sexual assault litigation began yesterday in San Francisco Superior Court. The case centers on an 18-year-old college student who alleges she was groped and nearly raped by an Uber driver during a 2019 ride to the airport. Plaintiffs allege Uber ignored internal warnings and underreported as many as 95,000 sexual violence incidents in a single year. This trial is one of 600 lawsuits consolidated before Judge Ethan P. Schulman and will serve as a test case for future proceedings and potential settlements. A separate federal MDL is scheduled to begin its first trial in January 2026. The federal litigation was initially scheduled for December 2025 (see update below).
The first bellwether trial in the federal Uber sexual assault multidistrict litigation (MDL) has been postponed to January 6, 2026. The delay, approved by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, follows unresolved discovery issues involving the plaintiff’s smartphone data and evidence preservation. The federal MDL, which includes more than 2,500 consolidated lawsuits in the Northern District of California, parallels a smaller wave of litigation (roughly 600 lawsuits) in California State court over alleged sexual assaults by Uber drivers. A separate bellwether trial in California state court began yesterday (see update above). The outcomes of both trials may help shape future settlements or verdicts.
A Rosemont, CA woman called an Uber after attending a concert in Sacramento and became sick during the ride, ABC 10 reported. The lawsuit alleges the driver left her near a gas station alone, intoxicated, and without her phone, eight miles from home. She was then approached by strangers who abducted her; she escaped after being assaulted at knifepoint and reached safety at a nearby school the next morning. The complaint faults Uber for abandoning a vulnerable passenger with no follow-up after her mother reported the incident. Uber responded that it “cannot comment on pending litigation” but is committed to rider safety. This case is a textbook representation of why so many survivors have filed claims against Uber; vulnerable riders deserve protection, not abandonment.
New local cases keep surfacing that remind us why Uber recieved over 400,000 reports of sexual misconduct or assault–from 2017 through 2022 alone. CBS Austin reported that Uber driver identified as Nawar Al Issa, 38, has been charged with attempted sexual assault after a November 2024 incident involving a female passenger in South Austin. According to police, the victim’s fiancé tracked her location to their apartment complex and found Al Issa in the back seat of his car with the unresponsive passenger. A Sexual Assault Nurse Examination later revealed DNA evidence linking him to the victim. Al Issa was arrested and is facing charges of attempted sexual assault, a third-degree felony.
While it may not directly impact the Uber driver sexual assault litigation, Uber’s newly launched Women Preferences pilot program offers insight into why the lawsuit wave exists in the first place. Having launched this summer in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Detroit, the feature allows women riders to request to be matched only with women drivers. Women drivers can also opt to accept only women riders during certain hours. Tyla.com reports that social media users quickly noticed that, visually, the women-only rides appeared to show lower pricing compared to other options. For passengers, that’s advantageous. However, for drivers, lower fares mean lower tips.
Other areas of concern: Uber noted it ‘cannot guarantee that all Users you are matched with while using this feature will be women, or appear in a way that you would identify as a woman’. Uber adds, “Please be mindful that the Uber community is remarkably diverse, including people of all gender identities and expressions. Some women Users may not express their gender or appear in a way that matches your perception of ‘femininity.'”
The first bellwether trial in the Uber passenger sexual assault multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 3084) is scheduled to begin December 8, 2025, with Dean v. Uber selected as the lead case. In her complaint, an Arizona woman alleges she was raped by an Uber driver after the company failed to act on prior reports of the driver’s misconduct.
A Montgomery County, PA Uber driver, 26-year-old Mirvan Dinler, is facing multiple charges after allegedly assaulting a Villanova University student in her dorm room in September 2024. The 21-year-old student testified that she had no memory of the ride after leaving a Philadelphia club and awoke to find Dinler in her room. Investigators say campus security footage and access card records show Dinler accompanying her into the building. Prosecutors had offered a plea deal of four to eight years in prison in exchange for reduced charges, but Dinler rejected the agreement. A trial is scheduled to begin January 26.
An Uber driver in Texas, Sameh Mohamad Chami, 49, has been arrested and charged with aggravated kidnapping after allegedly sexually assaulting a 21-year-old passenger. Police say the woman had requested a ride home but instead was taken to an empty parking lot. Authorities later confirmed that Chami, a Lebanese national, had overstayed a tourist visa by more than three years. Following his arrest, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued a detainer to transfer him into federal custody.
In one of the biggest developments in the Uber sexual assault litigation, the New York Times obtained unsealed court documents that reveal the scope of the problem verges on epidemic proportions. (Here’s our summary of the NYT investigation.) While Uber’s own public safety reports from 2017–2022 admitted to 12,522 serious sexual assault incidents, the newly revealed internal records show a staggering 400,181 reports of sexual misconduct during that same period. This figure is over 3,000% higher than the figures Uber disclosed.
And for those that believe sexual misconduct isn’t serious, imagine being a woman — as most victims are — who booked what should have been a safe, uneventful ride home. Instead, you find yourself groped or subjected to lewd, inappropriate comments from your driver, your sense of safety shattered in an instant. We can only guess how many cases of sexual inpropriety were not reported; the number of incidents is likely much higher.
One of the latest cases occurred in Texas on August 6, when 49-year-old Uber driver Sameh Chami, a migrant with an ICE detainer, was arrested and charged with aggravated kidnapping after allegedly assaulting a 21-year-old passenger. The woman had scheduled a ride from Galveston to her home in Friendswood in the early morning hours. Her family, tracking her trip via the Life360 app, saw the ride marked as “completed” at her residence — but her location showed otherwise. They found her in Chami’s car in an empty business parking lot, got her out, and took her home. Despite being intoxicated, she recalled Chami reaching into her pants. Police allege he intentionally ended the ride in the Uber app before the assault. Chami remains in custody.
Another recent rideshare sexual assault occurred in upstate New York, where local media reports that Thomas F. Cipriano, of Halfmoon, NY was arrested on August 7 for allegedly sexually assaulting a minor male passenger. According to the Saratoga County Sherrif’s Office, Cipriano was charged with felony second-degree attempted rape, unlawful imprisonment, and misdemeanor endangering the welfare of a child.
Late yesterday, A California judge denied Uber’s attempt to dismiss hundreds of sexual assault lawsuits, ruling that the company can be held to the same legal standard as a common carrier, Bloomberg Law reported. Judge Ethan P. Schulman of the San Francisco Superior Court found that Uber owes its passengers the “utmost care and diligence,” similar to a taxi or train service.
This decision clears the way for the first bellwether jury trial in the consolidated state court proceeding, which includes over 500 individual lawsuits filed by California passengers who say they were sexually assaulted by Uber drivers. That trial is scheduled to begin on September 8.
The ruling is a significant legal setback for Uber, which had argued it bears no duty to prevent unforeseeable criminal acts by independent drivers. The case runs parallel to ongoing federal multidistrict litigation in the Northern District of California, which includes more than 2,500 similar lawsuits from across the U.S.
As Uber prepares to roll out a “Women Preferences” feature in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Detroit, the company faces renewed scrutiny from survivor advocates and plaintiff attorneys. While the pilot allows women riders and drivers to opt for same-gender matches, critics say it’s a long-overdue step that doesn’t address deeper systemic failures. The update follows a July 2025 ruling in the Uber MDL, where a judge allowed certain product liability claims, citing the lack of gender-matching options, to proceed toward trial.
Although not as high-profile as recent developments in the Uber MDL bellwether trials (see next news update below), this local case is a stark reminder of why thousands of survivors have filed lawsuits against the rideshare giant. In Connecticut, a 17-year-old girl reported being sexually assaulted by her Uber driver in March 2025. Following an investigation, the driver—33-year-old Edgar Interiano of Norwalk—was arrested and charged with second-degree sexual assault, in addition to reckless endangerment and providing liquor to a minor. He remains in custody on $100,000 bond.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who is overseeing the Uber Driver Sexual Assault Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) has ordered that 12 of the 20 bellwether trial cases be transferred back to the states where the assaults occurred, citing the enforceability of Uber’s forum-selection clause in its Terms of Use. These clauses require disputes to be tried in the rider’s home jurisdiction. While unusual for an MDL—where bellwether trials are typically held in the central court—this decision does not dissolve the MDL itself, which still includes more than 2,800 lawsuits.
For plaintiff survivors, this ruling is mixed. On one hand, plaintiffs may benefit from trying their cases in home-state courts, which might offer local juries more sympathetic to community safety concerns. On the other hand, this splinters the bellwether process, which was designed to streamline outcomes and encourage early settlement. It may delay trial timelines and reduce pressure on Uber to settle en masse. That said, the core claims, alleging Uber failed to protect passengers from known risks, remain intact and will continue to be litigated aggressively in both federal and state courts.
As for why the eight other test cases were not remanded? It could have been for several reasons including the clause did not exist or apply at the time of the ride (Uber’s terms have changed over the years); the user wasn’t the account holder (e.g., a parent ordered the ride, but the survivor was the minor child); the clause was unconscionable or unenforceable under state law (e.g., it was buried in small print or contradicted public policy); or the lawsuit contains claims beyond the scope of the clause, such as third-party liability or product liability claims.
In a recent court ruling, Uber convinced a judge to dismiss one of the 20 bellwether lawsuits in the federal sexual assault litigation and exclude some legal claims. This may sound like bad news for the plaintiffs and future claimants. But the reality is that the core claims and arguments remain valid. The judge presiding over the consolidation of at least 2,359 federal Uber sexual assault cases in the multidistrict litigation, Judge Charles Breyer, ruled that claims accusing Uber of fraud in its advertising will not be heard. But the central issue remains: Uber is still being accused of failing to warn passengers about dangerous drivers and misrepresenting the safety of its platform. That argument, known as “fraud by omission,” is the backbone of the MDL as well as hundreds of similar lawsuits in state courts. Again, considering that Uber has tried to break up the MDL, this is latest development is not a pitfall for plaintiffs.
In other Uber driver sexual assault developments, a new lawsuit was filed in Louisiana by a woman who says she was assaulted by an Uber driver in New Orleans in August 2024.
The Uber sexual assault litigation continues to grow rapidly, with 2,359 cases now filed in the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) and over 600 more in California’s coordinated state court action (JCCP), bringing the total number of lawsuits to nearly 3,000.
Last month, eight new plaintiffs from across California filed a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court, alleging that Uber enabled their assaults by prioritizing growth over passenger safety. If these allegations sound like a broken record, it’s for a good reason. From relying on third-party vendors and digital checks that can miss prior criminal behavior to resisting safety features like in-car cameras or female-only driver options, Uber has repeatedly prioritized growth and cost-cutting over basic passenger protections, even after receiving multiple assault complaints about the same drivers.
A federal magistrate judge has ordered Checkr and Accurate Background to hand over background check reports for Uber drivers accused of sexual assault in the ongoing MDL bellwether cases. These records, treated as “attorneys’‑eyes‑only,” could help establish whether Uber overlooked red flags during driver screening, central to plaintiffs’ claims of systemic negligence.
The Uber sexual assault litigation continues to expand, with over 2,800 lawsuits now active across federal and state courts—2,229 in the federal MDL and 619 in California’s coordinated proceeding (JCCP), which is the state equivalent of an MDL. This sharp rise reinforces allegations that Uber’s failure to prevent driver sexual misconduct is systemic, not sporadic.
Meanwhile, legal efforts are intensifying behind the scenes. Plaintiffs are pushing for access to background checks from Checkr and Accurate Background, two screening companies hired by Uber. Both have refused to comply without a court order, triggering a potential legal showdown. And in a major procedural development, a Settlement Master has been appointed (Judge Gail Andler), signaling that early negotiations are underway and that Uber may be preparing for a global resolution.
Law360 reports that Uber is trying to move 13 of the 20 sexual assault cases out of California, where the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) is based. The company claims its terms of service require lawsuits to be heard in the state where each incident happened, such as Alabama, Georgia, Pennsylvania, etc.
But Uber’s tactic undermines the entire point of consolidating these cases into a single court: to expose systemic safety failures and hold the company accountable in one coordinated effort.
The cases were carefully selected by both sides under court supervision. They’ve already gone through months of discovery. Scattering them now would waste judicial resources, create delays, and risk inconsistent outcomes—all while benefiting the defendant.
Courts don’t always honor forum-selection clauses when they conflict with the public interest. Uber’s push to enforce them mid-litigation looks more like a strategic escape hatch than a legitimate legal argument.
At a hearing for the Uber Driver Sexual Assault MDL #3084 held earlier this month, Judge Charles Breyer made several important decisions about what plaintiffs’ lawyers can ask Uber in upcoming sworn depositions.
The plaintiffs had asked to question Uber about its past data deletion practices and whether the company had improperly used attorney-client privilege to hide information—claims they say point to a long-running cover-up. Uber pushed back, calling the requests too broad and based on speculation.
Judge Breyer issued a mixed ruling. He did not block the questions entirely, but did limit them. Plaintiffs can ask about Uber’s actual data retention policies and any missing documents tied to the case. However, they can’t ask questions based purely on rumors, books, or hearsay—such as claims from the book Super Pumped.
The judge also denied a request to force Uber executives to bring laptops and give live walkthroughs of company systems during depositions, saying that’s not allowed under court rules. If plaintiffs want to examine Uber’s systems, they’ll need to schedule that separately.
Lastly, Uber tried to reduce the amount of time its corporate witnesses must sit for questioning—from 10.5 hours to just 7. The judge rejected that request, saying Uber must follow the same rules previously set for all parties in the case.
Theodore Halls, Jr., a former Uber driver in Alabama is on trial for allegedly sexually assaulting two women during separate rides in 2020 and 2022. Both women were picked up near Auburn University and were reportedly unable to consent due to intoxication. Dashcam video and digital forensic evidence have become central to the prosecution’s case. Investigators say one of the women had no memory of the incident until she was later contacted by police after footage was recovered. The defendant, who remains in custody, faces multiple felony charges. One victim has reportedly settled a civil case with Uber, while the other lawsuit remains pending.
[June 17 update: WTVM (ABC 9) reports that Halls, Jr. was sentenced to more than 35 years in prison.]
The first bellwether trial in the Uber sexual assault multidistrict litigation (MDL #3084) is scheduled to begin on December 8, 2025, in the Northern District of California. U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer has selected six representative lawsuits involving a range of alleged assaults—from verbal harassment to rape—to test how juries respond to recurring claims in the broader litigation. The outcomes of these early trials will play a key role in shaping potential settlement strategies and guiding the resolution of more than 2,000 similar lawsuits pending against Uber.
At the end of March, 1,883 Uber driver sexual assault claims were consolidated in the multidistrict litigation (MDL). One month later, the number of claims surged 9.5%. There are now 2,062 active claims consolidated before Judge Charles Breyer in the Northern District of California in MDL #3084.
Police say 22-year-old Charles Willis used Uber to transport a 14-year-old girl from Barry County, Michigan, to his home in Northville. Authorities allege he unlawfully detained the girl and committed acts of abuse. Willis, who was reportedly already facing charges related to a prior incident, allegedly arranged and paid for the long-distance trip using the Uber app.
Although Uber’s policy prohibits unaccompanied minors from using the platform without adult supervision, questions persist about how well these rules are enforced. Investigators are reviewing how Willis was able to book the ride and whether the driver identified any warning signs. Law enforcement and safety experts continue to warn that rideshare apps are increasingly being misused by individuals targeting vulnerable users, including minors.
Police in Montgomery County have arrested Janaka Manatunga, 56, for allegedly assaulting a woman while working as an Uber driver. He was booked into the Montgomery County Jail on related charges, according to the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office.
Investigators said the incident occurred near Market Street in The Woodlands, according to local media reports in Houston.
A female driver was allegedly sexually assaulted by a male passenger who requested a ride in North Seekonk. Upon arrival, he reportedly directed her down a secluded driveway, where he attempted to sexually assault her. The driver managed to escape by accelerating the vehicle, causing the assailant to flee. Police later arrested the suspect, James D. Oakes, 25, charging him with multiple offenses, including attempted sexual assault and kidnapping.
While you usually hear about passengers getting assaulted by Uber drivers, this case is different. It shows that drivers can be victims too. Some drivers have even taken legal action against Uber, saying the company didn’t do enough to protect them. Uber has tried adding things like an emergency button in the app and GPS tracking, but some drivers have voiced concern, claiming these actions are still not enough. Drivers are putting themselves at risk every time they pick someone up — and they deserve real protection, not just a few features on a phone. Rideshare sexual assault attorneys can also represent drivers. If you’re a rideshare driver who has been assaulted, take the first step of finding out what your legal rights are by filling out a brief, confidential form.
Uber has threatened to shut down operations in Colorado if House Bill 1291 becomes law. The bill would impose new rideshare safety rules, such as mandatory background checks every six months, faster investigation of driver complaints, and audio/video recording of all rides. Uber claims the requirements are technically unworkable and would risk rider privacy, while supporters of the bill argue that these reforms are necessary to address rampant sexual assault issues tied to rideshare platforms.
This debate comes as Uber faces nearly 2,000 sexual assault lawsuits consolidated in federal court. Survivors and lawmakers argue that Uber’s pushback proves the company prioritizes profits over safety.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a lawsuit accusing Uber of deceptive billing practices tied to its Uber One subscription service. According to the FTC complaint, users were enrolled without consent, billed before free trials ended, and forced to navigate up to 23 screens to cancel a subscription that was advertised as “cancel anytime.” Some users said they were charged despite never knowingly signing up—or even having an Uber account.
Why does this matter for Uber sexual assault survivors? It reveals a troubling pattern: a company willing to prioritize profits at the expense of transparency and safety. Whether it’s burying critical terms in greyed-out text or fighting to keep sexual assault claims in arbitration, Uber’s behavior shows a consistent disregard for user rights.
A lawsuit filed by the family of a 13-year-old girl who was dropped off by an Uber driver and then sexually assaulted has reached a confidential settlement. The incident occurred in 2021 after the girl was picked up around 1:30 a.m. in Ventura and dropped off in the Harvard Heights section of Los Angeles, where the assault occurred. Although Uber denied liability, the case highlights the rideshare giant’s ongoing legal challenges. The settlement adds to growing scrutiny over Uber’s safety practices, as more than 1,900 similar claims are now centralized in a federal MDL.
Plaintiffs in the Uber sexual assault multidistrict litigation (MDL) filed a request asking U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer to consolidate multiple survivor claims for the first bellwether trial scheduled for December 2025. Uber opposes this request, arguing that each case should be tried individually. Plaintiffs argue that shared facts—such as Uber’s failure to mandate cameras, vet drivers properly, or address safety concerns—make consolidation appropriate for judicial efficiency. If the judge grants this request, multiple survivors could present their cases together, which may shape the outcome of future Uber sexual assault settlement negotiations. For plaintiffs, this could mean a more powerful platform to demonstrate systemic failure and increase potential compensation through stronger, unified testimony.
Following the addition of three dozen cases in February, the Uber sexual assault MDL added 283 cases in March, bringing the total of consolidated federal cases (Uber Technologies, Passenger Sexual Assault Multidistrict Litigation; MDL No. 3084) to 1,883.
Colorado House Bill 1291 aims to strengthen safety rules for Uber and Lyft by requiring more frequent driver background checks, faster response times to complaints, and mandatory audio/video recording during rides. The legislation is supported by Rep. Jenny Willford, who filed a lawsuit against Lyft after her own experience with sexual assault by a rideshare driver. Survivors and advocates say the bill is long overdue and necessary to hold rideshare companies accountable for rider safety.
Uber driver sexual assaults are also taking place all-too-frequently north of the border. CTV reports that an Uber driver who is a resident of the Toronto suburb of Oakville, Ontario, has been arrested for sexual assault of an Uber passenger. Hassan Ali Khan, 24, is believed by investigators to have sexually assaulted additional victims. Investigators are asking anyone with information to come forward, and to keep in mind that there is no statute of limitation when it comes to reporting sexual assault in Ontario. In most U.S. states, survivors of sexual assault have more time than ever to come forward as state legislators have become increasingly trauma-informed.
Frantz Fleureme, 32, allegedly propositioned the victim, grabbed her hand and tried to force her to inappropriately touch him during the ride, which occurred on March 1, according to Middletown Borough Police.
A 23-year-old woman in East Hartford, Connecticut, was allegedly sexually assaulted by her Uber driver just seconds after beginning her ride around 4 a.m. The driver, identified as Isaac Boafo, reportedly pulled into a restaurant parking lot, climbed into the back seat, and assaulted the passenger. The victim fought back, escaped the vehicle, and contacted police after a second Uber driver advised her to call 911. Boafo was later arrested and charged with first-degree sexual assault and disorderly conduct.
Philadelphia resident Angel Lopez was arrested for allegedly arranging an Uber to transport a 13-year-old girl from Western Pennsylvania to his apartment, where he drugged the girl and committed sexual offenses. Authorities say the two met via TikTok. The case highlights how rideshare services like Uber are not doing enough to prevent the sexual exploitation of minors.
Uber driver Joseph Graston was found guilty of unlawful sexual contact and unlawful touching. His arrest stems from a June 2022 incident in which a woman took an Uber home from a Bangor nightclub and later reported she was sexually assaulted by the driver. This case adds to the growing national scrutiny over Uber’s safety practices and comes amid ongoing federal litigation involving 1,600 Uber sexual assault lawsuits.
Nevada lawmakers fast-tracked AB523, a bill that limits Uber’s liability for harm caused by its drivers or passengers, provided the company maintains at least $1 million in insurance coverage during rides—a reduction from the prior $1.5 million minimum. The bill is part of a six-year truce between Uber and the Nevada Justice Association, ending a heated legal and political fight. However, the bill does not shield Uber from ongoing lawsuits in the California multidistrict litigation (MDL), where the company faces over 1,600 sexual assault claims, including from survivors in Nevada.
A federal judge has ordered top Uber executives—including current CEO Dara Khosrowshahi and co-founder Travis Kalanick—to testify under oath in depositions for the Uber sexual assault multi-district litigation, which consolidates more than 1,600 cases filed by riders who allege they were sexually assaulted by Uber drivers. The ruling rejects Uber’s attempt to shield its leadership from depositions, stating that key safety decisions were made at the highest levels. Survivors claim Uber failed to vet drivers properly and falsely marketed its platform as safe.
A Georgia mother filed a lawsuit against Uber in Gwinnett County, alleging the company’s failure to implement proper safety measures enabled her 14-year-old daughter to be exploited after being transported by an Uber driver to meet a 24-year-old man now facing criminal charges. The lawsuit accuses Uber of negligence, asserting that the company prioritizes avoiding liability over protecting minors. This case adds to growing scrutiny of Uber’s handling of rider safety, especially involving minors, and comes as the company faces over 1,600 federal sexual assault cases consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL) in California—an effort Uber unsuccessfully tried to dismiss.
CBS News Miami reported that Uber driver Yaroslandys Romero, 35, who has been accused of sexually assaulting a female passenger, appeared in bond court after his arrest. Charged with sexual battery, battery and indecent exposure, Romero, according to an arrest report, picked up the victim from a friend’s house and initially drove as she sat in the backseat. After she had requested a phone charger, he suggested she move to the front seat to be closer to his phone. Once she sat up front, Romero allegedly began touching her arm and asked for a kiss. From there, the sexual assault took
place.
The Los Angeles Times reports that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied Uber’s petition to break up the consolidated sexual assault lawsuits in the Multidistrict Litigation (MDL 3084). Uber had sought a writ of mandamus to overturn the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s (JPML) decision to centralize the cases under 28 U.S.C. § 1407, arguing that the lawsuits should not be grouped together. The Ninth Circuit rejected Uber’s request, ruling that the JPML had not committed legal error or abused its discretion in deciding to consolidate the claims.
The MDL consists of lawsuits filed by survivors of sexual assault and harassment who allege that Uber failed to take reasonable steps to prevent misconduct by its drivers. Uber argued that its collective action waiver—a clause in its terms of service that prevents customers from filing joint lawsuits—should block centralization. However, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Uber’s private agreements could not override the authority granted to the JPML under federal law. The court also clarified that, unlike class actions, MDL cases do not need to have common questions of fact that predominate over individual ones, reinforcing the legitimacy of consolidating these lawsuits. This decision allows the Uber sexual assault MDL to proceed in federal court as a centralized legal action.
Two new lawsuits filed in San Francisco Superior Court accuse Uber of negligence and false advertising, alleging the company failed to implement effective safety measures despite knowing that drivers were sexually assaulting passengers. The lawsuits involve 27 reported incidents from 2017 to 2024 and were brought by a total of 27 plaintiffs—24 women and three men in California and New York, the San Francisco Standard reported.
One lawsuit, filed by 21 women and two men, argues that Uber misrepresented its safety policies, particularly when marketing to vulnerable riders, such as intoxicated passengers and women traveling alone. The second lawsuit, filed by three women and one man, includes similar allegations of Uber failing to screen drivers properly and allowing repeated safety failures.
Both cases cite Uber’s 2019 Safety Report, which admitted that sexual assaults had occurred, yet plaintiffs argue the company continued neglecting proper driver screening and passenger protections. The lawsuits seek to hold Uber accountable under negligence and consumer protection laws, claiming the company’s failure to act responsibly put passengers at risk. Uber declined to comment on the litigation but stated it is working to improve safety measures.
Reading the latest headlines can be emotionally taxing. But taking action to pursue justice doesn’t have to be. In fact, thousands of lawsuits are moving forward. Don’t miss your window to file.
Uber operates in over 10,000 cities worldwide, completing millions of rides every day. But here’s the disturbing reality:
Survivors and legal experts say that Uber’s background check system is deeply flawed, allowing predators to slip through the cracks.
Uber driver sexual assault lawsuits argue that the company prioritized growth and profit over passenger safety. Keep in mind that Uber is worth over $195 billion on the stock market (market capitalization as of August 2025). Instead of implementing strong safety policies, Uber focused on getting as many drivers as possible on the road as quickly as possible. The company’s goal prioritized stock valuation over passenger safety.
And when it came to passenger safety, Uber flat out lied. For years, the rideshare giant bragged about having top-tier background checks. In 2014, amid growing concerns over sexual assault committed by its drivers, Uber instituted a “Safe Ride Fee.” This $1 tack-on per ride was supposed to boost Uber’s efforts to promote rider safety. Instead, the Safe Ride Fees the company raked in — totalling approximately $500 million — went straight to its bottom line.
Uber quietly pocketed half a billion dollars in so-called “safety fees” — without delivering any real safety improvements. It was profit masquerading as protection.
In 2016, Uber agreed to a $25 million settlement over the misleading marketing claims. As part of the agreement, Uber could no longer market itself as “the safest ride on the road” and describe its background checks as “the gold standard.” The settlement was a slap on the wrist. And while every rider was paying the Safe Ride Fee, here’s the inconvenient truth about Uber’s paltry background checks…
These low-security background checks allowed thousands of drivers with criminal histories — including sexual misconduct — to get approved. This recklessness put scores of passengers, especially women, at serious risk. In fact, a 2018 CNN investigation revealed more than 100 Uber drivers had been accused of sexually assaulting or abusing passengers in just the preceding four years.
And that was just the beginning. Since that 2018 report, thousands more women and families have come forward, alleging that Uber’s background checks failed to keep known predators off the road.
Survivors are speaking up — and regulators are finally taking notice. In recent years, Uber has been forced to answer for its failure to protect riders from harm. One of the most significant actions? A $9 million penalty for under-reporting thousands of sexual assault cases in California.
In 2021, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved a $9 million settlement with Uber after the company failed to properly document and report these sexual assault incidents. After Uber disclosed receiving nearly 6,000 sexual assault and harassment reports in its first Safety Report, the CPUC demanded the company submit detailed data and respond to questions about the reported incidents. However, Uber refused to comply, arguing that releasing the information would be a “shocking violation of privacy.”
Reading about Uber’s deceptive and profit-driven tactics may add to the trauma that survivors have already endured. This is why it’s important to focus on what you as a survivor can control: seeking justice, holding Uber accountable, and finding the support you need to heal.
Whether that means filing a lawsuit, connecting with survivor advocacy groups, or simply learning about your rights, you don’t have to go through this alone.
If an Uber driver sexually assaulted you, you may have the right to sue Uber for negligence. These lawsuits argue that Uber:
The short answer: No.
If thousands of people have been sexually assaulted by Uber drivers, why isn’t there one big class action lawsuit where survivors can all file together? Wouldn’t that make things easier?
The reason: It wouldn’t be fair to survivors.
Class action lawsuits work best when all plaintiffs have identical claims, such as a defective product where every consumer experienced the same issue. (Example: defective airbags in cars that are recalled by the manufacturer.)
However, in sexual assault cases, every survivor’s experience is different. Some were groped. Some were raped. Some suffered physical injuries. Many survivors are coping with severe emotional trauma. The level of evidence, damages, and legal arguments vary from case to case.
In a class action, everyone gets the exact same settlement amount, often for pennies on the dollar of what a plaintiff jury verdict would award. The difference could mean a settlement of a few thousand dollars per class member versus a multi-million-dollar jury award for one plaintiff. Hypothetically, if a class action were to be certified to resolve Uber sexual assault lawsuits, survivors who have undergone the most harm might receive far less than they would in an individual lawsuit.
Furthermore, a class action would take away control from survivors since class actions are typically handled by one legal team making decisions for everyone rather than letting survivors pursue justice in the best way for them.
Another key reason there’s no class action lawsuit against Uber is that the company has actively worked to block them.
Before 2018, Uber’s terms of service included mandatory arbitration and class action waivers, forcing survivors into private, undisclosed claim resolutions instead of allowing them to take Uber to court. These clauses were designed to prevent customers from filing lawsuits as a group, shielding Uber from public legal battles.
However, after mounting pressure from advocacy groups, media scrutiny, and legal challenges, Uber was forced to change its policy.
It’s important to note that 14 female survivors played a big role in these policy changes. They courageously came forward and sent a letter to Uber’s board requesting to be released from arbitration. Their bravery also resulted in Uber no longer requiring any survivors to sign nondisclosure agreements if they wish to speak out about their claims.
Thanks to the courage of these and other survivors, today, sexual assault survivors can sue Uber either individually or collectively through legal avenues like Multidistrict Litigation (MDL; see section below).
In other words, while Uber no longer forces arbitration, survivors must still pursue their cases separately rather than through a single class action.
→ Not sure if you have a case? Our legal intake team is here to listen — confidentially, respectfully, and at no cost to you.
Our compassionate intake specialists are here to help you get matched with an attorney who understands rideshare sexual assault cases. You won’t have to pay anything up front, and your information will stay completely confidential. The attorneys we work with operate on a contingency basis, meaning they only get paid if you win your case or receive a settlement.
Although every survivor’s experience is uniquely harrowing, the lawsuits share similar facts and claims. As mentioned, Uber’s effort to prevent a group legal action has been denied.
Consequently, as of September 2025, more than 2,500 Uber sexual assault cases have been consolidated (grouped together) into the MDL. This means that these cases are joined together into one legal action. Approximately 500 similar cases are consolidated in California litigation. The first California test case (also called a bellwether trial) began on Sept. 8, 2025. (We’ll keep updating this page as updates come in.)
If you’re considering filing a claim, our intake team can help you understand your options confidentially and at no cost.
As noted above, a class action lawsuit involves many plaintiffs who share a similar claim against a defendant. The outcome applies to everyone in the class, whether they actively participate or not.
On the other hand, a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is a group of separate lawsuits filed by different plaintiffs but consolidated into one federal district court for pretrial proceedings. These proceedings establish essential facts about the litigation and streamline evidence gathering and legal arguments. Each case remains individual, meaning plaintiffs can settle or go to trial separately.
The key difference is that in a class action, one ruling applies to all class members, while in an MDL, each case is handled separately after pretrial proceedings.
Think of a class action as one big case with a single outcome, and an MDL as many separate cases moving together for efficiency.
As of September 2025, the Uber Passenger Sexual Assault Multidistrict Litigation (MDL #3084) has consolidated more than 2,500 pending cases across 29 states. The first wave of test cases in the MDL (called “bellwether trials”) are scheduled for December 2025. (The first trial, Dean v. Uber, has been pushed back to January 2026 from December 8, 2025.)
The “Discovery Phase” of the litigation is scheduled to close toward the end of September 2025.
Overseen by Judge Charles Breyer, the MDL is in the pretrial phase and was approved by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) in 2023 and centralized in the United States District Court’s Northern District of California.
The MDL was assigned to this district because Uber’s headquarters is in San Francisco. This makes the Northern District of California the logical venue for federal cases involving multiple plaintiffs from different states.
(Uber unsuccessfully attempted to have the term “sexual assault” stricken from the MDL title.)
The MDL structure helps federal courts handle large volumes of similar lawsuits without clogging the system.
According to the Northern District of California District Court, the litigation centers around the failure of Uber Technologies to:
“…implement appropriate safety precautions to protect passengers. Plaintiffs are former Uber passengers who were sexually assaulted or harassed by their Uber drivers. Plaintiffs bring various claims against Uber, including negligence, breach of contract, and product liability claims.”
When multiple people sue a company like Uber for similar reasons—such as failing to protect passengers from sexual assault—those lawsuits can get really complicated. Instead of having hundreds of separate cases scattered across different courts, an MDL groups them together in one court to streamline the process.
Here’s why that matters for survivors:
Bottom line: An MDL levels the playing field against a powerful corporation like Uber, while keeping each survivor’s voice and case distinct.
It’s no surprise Uber has filed multiple motions to dismantle the MDL. If the company loses even a few of the initial bellwether trials, it could face substantial financial liability.
Bloomberg News announced that Uber Technologies Inc. failed to convince a San Francisco federal appeals court to separate more than a thousand lawsuits filed by riders who allege they were sexually assaulted by Uber drivers. In other words, Uber unsuccessfully tried to have the MDL dismantled. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected Uber’s argument that its terms of use agreement prevents passengers from filing coordinated or consolidated lawsuits against the company. Thus, the MDL stands as a potential legal avenue for survivors to receive a significant settlement or jury award for the nightmare they have endured.
The MDL isn’t the only Uber sexual assault litigation on the books. Hundreds of similar lawsuits have also been filed in state courts, with more than 500 consolidated in California alone. That brings the total number of federal and California lawsuits to more than 3,000 as of September 2025.
To reiterate the massive scope of Uber’s negligence, based on its own data, 9,805 reports of sexual assault incidents were documented in its rides, including 852 reports of rape. However, these incidents only represent 2017 through the end of 2022. There are likely many additional incidents beyond this timeframe.
In fact, the true scope is far greater: hundreds of thousands more incidents, as the New York Times reported in early August 2025.
Considering these sobering statistics, it is very likely that many more plaintiffs will be added to the MDL or state court dockets.
Not every case joins the MDL. Here’s why:
Cases placed into the MDL are generally considered stronger and more likely to result in higher settlements—but filing in state court can still lead to meaningful compensation.
You’re not alone. Our intake team can help you connect with an experienced Uber sexual assault attorney who will evaluate your case.
Our partner attorneys who work with survivors understand that survivors seek far more than punishment of the perpetrators. What survivors seek is recognition and acknowledgment of the harm.
Survivors also want accountability from those who allowed it. With support from the attorneys we may connect you with, your story will be taken seriously, and the healing process can begin.
If you were sexually assaulted during or after an Uber ride, you might be wondering if you have the right to take legal action. Many survivors are eligible to file lawsuits against Uber, whether the assault happened inside the vehicle, after the ride ended, or under circumstances where Uber’s negligence played a role.
Here are some of the main types of survivors who may be eligible to file an Uber sexual assault lawsuit:
The majority of Uber sexual assault lawsuits involve riders who were attacked by their drivers. This includes any form of sexual violence, from unwanted touching and groping to rape and other non-consensual acts. Even if you were not physically harmed, you may still be able to file a lawsuit if the driver engaged in harassment, coercion, or any form of sexual misconduct.
You may also be eligible to file a lawsuit if you were assaulted because of Uber’s negligence, even if the perpetrator wasn’t the driver. Examples include:
Some drivers have also been victims of sexual assault by riders. If you were attacked while working for Uber and the company failed to protect you, you may also have grounds for legal action.
Consent is not legally valid if the victim is under 18, intoxicated, asleep, or otherwise incapacitated when the assault occurs. If an Uber driver took advantage of your vulnerability, you still have the right to pursue justice, even if you don’t remember al
Many survivors feel uncertain about whether they have a case, especially if they don’t remember everything or didn’t report the assault immediately. But here’s the truth: You don’t have to have all the answers right now.
An experienced rideshare sexual assault lawyer can review your situation confidentially and help you determine the best legal path forward. Even if you’re unsure, reaching out for legal guidance is free and could help you understand your rights.
Most Uber sexual assault lawsuits focus on holding the company accountable for its lack of proper safety measures and failure to vet drivers adequately (insufficient background checks). Survivors may also choose to sue the driver individually, depending on the circumstances.
Here’s what your options look like:
As mentioned earlier, Uber falsely marketed itself as a safe transportation option. Yet, there have been more than 10,000 incidents of sexual assault by Uber drivers for the six years Uber has released safety reports (2017-2022). Survivors can file a lawsuit against Uber for failing to properly screen drivers, protect passengers, and take appropriate action when misconduct is reported.
These lawsuits argue that Uber prioritized rapid growth and profit over rider safety, allowing dangerous individuals to drive for the platform without thorough background checks or oversight. If Uber knew about the safety risks and failed to act, the company can be held responsible.
In some cases, survivors may also choose to sue the driver directly for sexual assault, harassment, or other misconduct. However, this route may not always be practical. Many drivers lack the financial resources to compensate victims. In most situations, suing Uber is the more effective path to justice.
It’s also important to understand that individuals cannot file criminal charges against an Uber driver for sexual assault. Only a District Attorney can prosecute criminal cases. However, survivors can file a civil lawsuit to seek financial compensation for medical expenses, therapy, lost wages, and other damages.
Not sure what to do next?
You’re not alone, and you don’t have to figure it out by yourself. [Click here to skip to the form below.] Our trained rideshare intake specialists may be able to connect you with an attorney who understands these cases and can guide you forward.
The statute of limitations is the legal deadline for filing a lawsuit. It varies by state; in some states, that window could be as short as one or two years. Other states give survivors more time, especially if the survivor was underage when the assault occurred.
Additionally, some states have passed “lookback window” laws. These are temporary openings that let survivors file lawsuits even if the assault happened long ago. These expanded litigation windows are limited-time opportunities, and each state has different rules. That’s why it’s essential to speak with an attorney familiar with the latest laws in your state.
In certain cases, survivors may be able to file after the standard deadline has passed. For example, some states follow a “delayed discovery rule,” which allows extra time if a survivor only recently linked their trauma to the assault. Similarly, if Uber tried to hide evidence of its negligence, an attorney may argue the time limit should be extended.
Unsure if the window has closed for your opportunity to hold Uber accountable and receive compensation for the trauma you’ve endured?
A qualified rideshare assault lawyer can help you understand your rights. Our intake staff may help connect you with an attorney specializing in these delicate cases.
If you win your case against Uber, you may be entitled to significant financial compensation, which can include:
While no amount of money can erase the trauma, it can help survivors rebuild their lives and hold Uber accountable.
Most cases fall into one of three general compensation tiers based on the seriousness of the harm and the evidence available:
These are cases where the assault involved physical violence, long-lasting emotional trauma (like PTSD), medical treatment, or situations where Uber knew about prior warnings or red flags and did nothing. If your story falls here, especially if there’s strong documentation, witness statements, or proof of serious company negligence, this is the range your case may fit into.
These cases involve sexual assault or misconduct where the harm was deeply impactful but may lack full medical documentation or physical evidence. Emotional trauma is real. If your mental health was affected and therapy was needed, or if a prior pattern of complaints exists even without violence, this tier may apply.
This level typically covers survivors who were harassed, groped, or subjected to inappropriate behavior that caused emotional distress, but without physical harm or severe trauma. If there’s limited evidence beyond a reported incident, your case may fall here.
The value of your case depends on many factors: how severe your experience was, what evidence supports your claims, and whether there are records showing Uber ignored risks. That’s why connecting with a rideshare assault attorney is so important. They can assess where your experience fits and guide you toward the tier that makes sense for your situation.
If you’re considering legal action, here’s what you need to do:
Going up against a billion-dollar company like Uber isn’t easy.
Survivors who have an experienced attorney on their side are far more likely to win their cases and receive fair compensation:
If you or a loved one has been assaulted by an Uber driver, you have rights. Holding Uber accountable can help prevent future assaults and give survivors the justice they deserve.
Don’t wait. Time limits apply. Contact our intake department to be connected with a rideshare sexual assault attorney and receive a free, confidential consultation.
Uber may decide to resolve thousands of sexual abuse cases through a settlement rather than risk jury trials that could award massive damages. A settlement offer could be announced at any time—but once approved, it may close to new plaintiffs. That’s why it’s important to act quickly.
Compensation from a lawsuit can also support your recovery, including therapy and other vital healing resources.
Don’t forget: Your voice matters. Your case matters. Fight for the justice you deserve.
If you’re a survivor of sexual assault involving an Uber driver, you likely have many questions about your legal options, rights, and what to expect.
Yes. Survivors can file lawsuits against Uber as a company for failing to protect passengers and properly screen drivers. You may also be able to sue the driver individually, though many survivors choose to focus their legal action on Uber because the company has greater financial responsibility and liability.
No. While thousands of survivors have come forward, sexual assault cases are not handled as a class action because each survivor’s experience is unique. Instead, lawsuits have been consolidated into Multidistrict Litigation (MDL 3084), which allows survivors to file separately while sharing pretrial proceedings. Uber driver sexual assault lawsuits have also been filed in several state courts.
Class action lawsuits treat all plaintiffs as a single group, and one outcome applies to everyone.
MDLs group cases together for efficiency, but each survivor’s lawsuit remains separate and can have its own outcome or settlement.
This means that in an MDL, you maintain control over your individual case rather than being forced into a single settlement.
You may qualify if you:
✔ Were a passenger assaulted by an Uber driver
✔ Were sexually assaulted due to an Uber driver’s negligence
✔ Were harassed, stalked, or harmed by an Uber driver before, during, or after a ride
✔ Were under 18, intoxicated, or unconscious at the time of the assault
If you’re unsure, an Uber sexual assault attorney can review your case and help determine your legal options.
If your lawsuit is successful, you may be eligible for compensation for:
Settlement amounts vary depending on case strength, evidence, and severity of the assault.
This depends on state laws. Each state has a statute of limitations that sets a deadline for filing a lawsuit. Some states allow only a few years, while others have extended time limits. Speaking with a lawyer as soon as possible can help ensure you don’t miss your chance to file.
Not necessarily. Most cases settle before trial, meaning you may never have to go to court. However, if your case does proceed to trial, an attorney will support you through the process to ensure you feel safe and prepared.
Even if you don’t recall all the details, you may still have a case. If you were intoxicated, unconscious, or in shock, that does not mean the assault didn’t happen. An attorney can help gather evidence and build your case based on available records, such as Uber ride logs and law enforcement reports.
No. Uber cannot legally retaliate against survivors who take legal action. If you experience harassment or threats after filing, notify your attorney immediately.
Most Uber sexual assault attorneys work on a contingency basis, meaning you pay nothing upfront. They only get paid if you win your case, taking a percentage of your settlement or verdict.
First, speak with an experienced Uber sexual assault lawyer. They will:
✔ Evaluate your case for free
✔ Explain your legal options
✔ Handle all legal filings and negotiations
There is no pressure to take legal action. But at the very least, it helps to understand what your legal rights are. Contact us so that we may connect you with an experienced Uber sexual assault attorney today for a free, confidential consultation.