Is There an Uber Class Action Lawsuit for Sexual Assault?

Class Action vs. MDL: What’s the Difference?

Many Uber sexual assault victims who want to pursue legal action wonder whether the lawsuits against Uber are part of a class action.

While both class actions and multidistrict litigations (MDLs) involve groups of people harmed in similar ways, they function very differently, especially in how survivors maintain control over their individual claims.

A class action treats all plaintiffs as one unified group, resulting in a single verdict or settlement that applies to everyone.

In contrast, an MDL brings individual lawsuits together before one judge for efficiency, but each case remains separate and is judged on its own facts.

For survivors, this distinction matters.

The Uber cases are not a class action but rather an MDL, which means each survivor can present their unique story, evidence, and damages while benefiting from shared legal resources and coordinated discovery.

This structure gives Uber passengers who were assaulted the opportunity to prove sexual assault and negligence without sacrificing their individual voices in the legal process.

Understanding this difference helps survivors make informed decisions about their rights, timelines, and next steps in seeking justice.

How a Class Action Works

A class action lawsuit allows a large number of people with similar complaints to combine their claims into one unified case.

Instead of each person filing separately, one or a few plaintiffs represent the entire group, and the outcome (whether it’s a settlement or a verdict) applies to everyone in the class.

This approach works best when every claim is nearly identical and the harm suffered is financial or procedural, not deeply personal or physical.

Class actions make it easier to resolve many small, similar cases at once without overwhelming the court system.

In a class action:

• One or a few “representative plaintiffs” file on behalf of the entire group.
• The court must certify the group as a “class” with shared legal and factual issues.
• A single outcome applies to all members—no individual trials or separate awards.
• Most class members never appear in court or communicate directly with attorneys.

Class actions are rarely used for cases involving physical or emotional harm, like sexual assault, because each survivor’s experience, injuries, and recovery are highly individual.

In these situations, grouping everyone under one verdict wouldn’t reflect the personal nature of each case.

Instead, courts use multidistrict litigation (MDL), which lets survivors share evidence and resources while maintaining their right to an individual claim and outcome.

How an MDL Works

A multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a special legal process used when many people file similar lawsuits against the same defendant – in this case, Uber Technologies.

Instead of merging every case into one, the MDL brings all individual lawsuits before a single federal judge for pretrial coordination.

This allows shared evidence, consistent rulings, and more efficient progress without taking away each person’s right to have their case heard individually.

After pretrial steps like discovery and early rulings, cases may be sent back to their original courts for trial or may reach settlements during the process.

In an MDL:

• Each survivor files their own lawsuit but benefits from coordinated discovery and legal rulings.
• The cases are managed by one federal judge. For Uber, that’s Judge Charles Breyer in the Northern District of California.
• Common issues, such as Uber’s driver screening policies or app safety features, are handled collectively to avoid repetition.
• Bellwether trials are selected to test how juries respond to certain facts and legal arguments.
• Individual cases can still settle or proceed to trial based on their specific circumstances and evidence.

This structure makes sense for claims involving personal injury or trauma, where each survivor’s experience is unique but rooted in the same corporate failures.

The Uber sexual assault cases are part of this MDL process, which balances efficiency with fairness, allowing survivors to maintain their personal voice and seek justice without being reduced to a single group claim.

Why Uber Sexual Assault Claims Use an MDL

The decision to consolidate the many Uber lawsuits into a multi-district litigation (MDL) is rooted in the nature of rideshare sexual assault claims themselves.

While each survivor’s story is unique, many of the legal issues overlap.

Coordinating these cases in federal court helps ensure uniform rulings on shared questions like whether Uber had a duty to implement safeguards and whether the company failed to properly vet drivers or respond to prior warnings.

This structure also makes it easier for Uber sexual assault settlement discussions to occur because both sides can more easily compare critical evidence, account for common issues, and negotiate across multiple cases rather than dozens of individual lawsuits.

For survivors, the MDL offers advantages in legal representation: they can join a broader legal strategy, access resources for discovery and expert testimony, and benefit from attorneys managing coordination of filings and motions.

It also provides a framework for support survivors in presenting their claims, especially when many were discouraged from reporting incidents or feared speaking out on their own.

The MDL structure balances efficiency with respect for individual voices, allowing each survivor who experienced a sexual assault committed by an Uber driver to preserve their right to a tailored outcome and compensation.

Where Uber Sexual Assault Cases Are Being Heard

Uber sexual assault claims involving physical assault, sexual abuse, inappropriate comments, or other forms of sexual violence are being pursued by former Uber passengers in multiple legal venues.

Many cases are consolidated in the federal MDL (Uber Technologies Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation), where shared legal issues, such as Uber’s alleged failure to protect passengers, can be addressed under one judge’s oversight.

These cases often center around incidents initiated through the Uber app, where survivors say misconduct occurred during or shortly after a ride.

In parallel, a California state court coordinated proceeding (JCCP in San Francisco Superior Court) is handling cases where the incidents happened within the state, giving some plaintiffs an additional pathway to seek justice.

The presence of multiple forums means that survivors’ legal options may depend on where the assault occurred and which court provides the strongest protections.

Regardless of venue, the core allegations remain consistent: that Uber’s policies and safeguards were inadequate to prevent sexual assault incidents and other misconduct.

The Uber Technologies Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation

The MDL (formally titled In re: Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation (MDL No. 3084)) is the federal mechanism used to manage the growing number of rideshare sexual assault lawsuits against Uber.

Rather than each case proceeding in a different jurisdiction with its own rules and timeline, the MDL allows Uber drivers sexually assaulted plaintiffs’ claims to be coordinated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, under one judge.

The MDL handles common legal questions, such as whether Uber failed to implement appropriate safety measures, how internal reports of sexual assault are assessed, and how liability may arise under app design or company policy theories.

Because many claims allege that Uber’s conduct contributed to harm, the coordinated approach helps reduce duplicative efforts while preserving each survivor’s right to fight for financial compensation.

From the start, the MDL has evolved in scope and scale: the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidated the first cases in late 2023 based on shared factual threads, like Uber’s duties around driver vetting and response to misconduct.

Over time, the number of pending cases has swelled, reflecting both higher awareness among survivors and expanding claims across U.S. states.

The MDL also sets the stage for Uber sexual assault settlement discussions, often centered on whether Uber should pay to resolve many claims, and how much those payouts should reflect systemic failures rather than isolated events.

Because it centralizes key phases (such as discovery, expert depositions, and certain motions) the MDL is a powerful tool for surfacing hidden information (including internal Uber documents) and forcing transparency in a litigation that otherwise might hide behind jurisdictional walls.

Still, the MDL process is not a shortcut: each plaintiff must prove their own claim, showing evidence that a sexual assault occurred and that Uber’s failures made it more likely.

As bellwether trials move forward, more data will shed light on how juries view these cases and what settlement values may look like.

California State Court Proceedings

In California, many Uber sexual assault cases are coordinated through a Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding (JCCP) in San Francisco Superior Court, under case number CJC-21-005188.

This state court track allows former Uber passengers whose assaults occurred in California to bring claims under state law, often with legal theories different from those in the federal MDL.

In one of the first trials in the California state track, a jury found that Uber was negligent in its safety practices, but ruled that Uber’s negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the survivor’s harm.

That case is being watched closely as a bellwether for how juries may view Uber’s conduct in these claims.

Because these cases are local, they can sometimes proceed faster or allow different legal arguments than federal cases.

Regardless of forum, survivors retain the option to pursue accountability and financial compensation through the courts.

The Legal Process for Uber Sexual Assault Lawsuits (From Consultation to Resolution)

Filing a lawsuit against Uber for sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct involves several stages designed to protect survivors’ rights while building a strong case for justice.

Each step is guided by an experienced attorney who understands the emotional, legal, and procedural challenges that survivors face.

The process begins with confidential discussions about the survivor’s experience and the available evidence, such as sexual assault reports or communications through the Uber app.

Lawyers then determine whether the case should proceed individually or as part of the ongoing multidistrict litigation (MDL).

Throughout the case, attorneys work to prove that Uber failed to take appropriate safety precautions to prevent the assault or harassment.

Survivors can seek compensation for physical injuries, emotional trauma, and loss of personal security.

A key part of this process involves gathering detailed records and testimony to support the claim while negotiating for a fair settlement that reflects the full extent of harm.

With the help of an experienced sexual assault lawyer, survivors can move through each phase with clarity, advocacy, and compassion.

Here’s how the process typically unfolds within the Uber Sexual Assault MDL:

1. Initial Consultation and Case Review: Survivors meet with an experienced attorney to discuss their experience and determine whether their claim aligns with the ongoing Uber MDL. The lawyer reviews available sexual assault reports, trip data, and other documentation to assess eligibility.
2. Filing a Short-Form Complaint: Instead of a full, individual lawsuit, attorneys file a short-form complaint directly into the MDL in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, joining the coordinated litigation overseen by Judge Charles Breyer.
3. Centralized Discovery Phase: Both plaintiffs’ lawyers and Uber’s defense team share and review evidence related to sexual harassment, physical injuries, and the company’s alleged failure to implement appropriate safety precautions. This phase often includes reviewing internal Uber safety records and corporate communications.
4. Pretrial Motions and Rulings: The court rules on key legal issues that apply to all cases—such as whether Uber can be held liable for assaults committed by its drivers or whether certain claims should move forward.
5. Bellwether Case Selection: A handful of representative cases are chosen as bellwether trials to test the strength of arguments, evidence, and potential jury reactions. These outcomes help guide settlement negotiations and shape broader litigation strategy.
6. Settlement Negotiations: Based on discovery findings and bellwether outcomes, both sides may engage in Uber sexual assault settlement discussions aimed at achieving a fair settlement for survivors collectively or individually.
7. Remand or Resolution: If a case does not settle, it may be sent (“remanded”) back to the survivor’s home district for an individual trial. Survivors maintain the right to continue pursuing their own claims for financial compensation.
8. Post-Settlement Support: After resolution, attorneys assist survivors with confidentiality protections, payment processing, and continued access to support resources that prioritize healing and personal safety.

Evidence in Uber Sexual Assault Lawsuits

Evidence is one of the most critical parts of proving a sexual assault claim against Uber.

Because each case involves different facts and levels of documentation, survivors and attorneys work together to collect materials that show what happened, how Uber responded, and how the company’s failures contributed to the harm.

Even if no police report was filed immediately after the assault, other forms of evidence can support a survivor’s credibility and establish liability.

Lawyers handling these cases focus on connecting each survivor’s experience to Uber’s broader record of reported safety problems and inadequate prevention measures.

Common types of evidence in Uber sexual assault lawsuits include:

• Uber trip history, receipts, and GPS location data from the Uber app
• In-app messages or communication between the passenger and driver
• Safety complaint records and sexual assault reports filed through Uber’s system
• Medical records, therapy notes, or hospital documentation showing physical or emotional trauma
• Police reports or legal filings related to the assault
• Witness statements or communications made shortly after the incident
• Photos, audio, or text messages that document driver behavior or aftermath

Together, these pieces of evidence help attorneys build a clear narrative showing both the survivor’s experience and Uber’s failure to implement adequate safety practices.

Damages in Uber Sexual Assault Cases

In Uber sexual assault lawsuits, damages refer to the measurable harm that survivors suffered because of the assault and Uber’s alleged negligence.

These damages include both financial losses and the emotional and psychological toll caused by trauma.

A lawyer helps assess and calculate these damages by reviewing medical bills, therapy records, and the long-term impact on a survivor’s personal and professional life.

By documenting every aspect of harm, an attorney can advocate for maximum compensation and ensure that settlement negotiations or trial outcomes reflect the full scope of what the survivor has endured.

Common types of damages in Uber sexual assault cases include:

• Medical expenses for emergency care and follow-up treatment
• Mental health therapy and long-term counseling costs
• Lost wages or reduced earning capacity
• Pain and suffering for emotional distress and trauma
• Loss of enjoyment of life or ability to participate in normal activities
• Future medical and psychological care costs
• Punitive damages when Uber’s negligence or misconduct is deemed especially severe

Timing and Deadlines in Uber Sexual Assault Lawsuits

The amount of time survivors have to file an Uber sexual assault lawsuit depends on state-specific statutes of limitations and the circumstances surrounding the assault.

In many states, victims of sexual assault are granted extended filing periods due to the traumatic nature of these crimes and the delayed reporting that often follows.

However, waiting too long can still impact a survivor’s ability to pursue compensation, especially if critical evidence or records become harder to obtain.

Rideshare sexual assault attorneys can review when the incident occurred, whether exceptions apply, and how ongoing litigation timelines may affect your eligibility.

Because many Uber claims are now part of a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL), deadlines may differ from individual lawsuits filed in state court.

The safest step is to contact an attorney as soon as possible to protect your right to seek justice and participate in ongoing settlement discussions.

TorHoerman Law: Uber Sexual Assault Lawyers

The New York Times investigation exposed deeply troubling details about Uber’s internal safety reports, revealing thousands of incidents of sexual misconduct and assault involving Uber drivers nationwide.

These findings confirmed what survivors had long been saying: that the company failed to adequately protect its passengers and ignored opportunities to strengthen safety protocols.

At TorHoerman Law, our law firm is committed to standing with survivors who were failed by the system and deserve to be heard.

We combine compassion with extensive legal experience in complex litigation to help survivors pursue justice and financial recovery.

If you or someone you love experienced sexual assault or harassment during an Uber ride, you are not alone and you have legal options.

Contact TorHoerman Law today for a free and completely confidential consultation to discuss your potential claim.

You can also use the secure chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify to file. Survivors pay no legal fees unless we win your case.