Uber/Lyft Rideshare Assault Mass Tort Marketing Campaigns

The Uber MDL now includes 1,564 consolidated cases, with 50 new filings since December 2024. Over 2,000 lawsuits, including 513 in California state court, are pending. A status conference on Friday, January 24, will address the bellwether selection process, with parties exchanging choices by February 14, 2025, per PTO #21.

A new lawsuit filed by a Peoria, Arizona, resident identified as Jane Roe CL 95 in Arizona alleges that an Uber driver sexually assaulted her during a ride in Flagstaff on January 11, 2023. The plaintiff claims Uber’s inadequate driver vetting and oversight created unsafe conditions, directly contributing to the incident.

The court has also since rejected Uber’s push to limit discovery, requiring custodial documents through December 1, 2024, and allowing tailored discovery for later records. Attempts to delay depositions were also denied, reinforcing timely compliance and prioritizing accountability for policies impacting passenger safety.

By the third week of the month, the parties in the Uber sexual assault litigation have also reached an agreement on the production of U.S. Safety Report data, resolving prior access issues. Uber will provide comprehensive datasets on 375 incidents in phases, with final production due by March 14, 2025.

The Uber sexual assault MDL saw 48 new cases added in the previous month, bringing the total number of pending cases to 1,459 at the start of December.

In the Uber sexual assault MDL, the court rejected overly broad privilege claims, reminding defendants that privilege only shields documents primarily focused on legal advice. Business-related materials, including PR drafts and internal updates, must be disclosed. This decision reinforces accountability and challenges the misuse of privilege to hide sensitive but non-legal communications.

The court has also outlined a clear path forward: 20 bellwether cases will be selected by February 14, 2025, with amended complaints due by March 14, 2025. Discovery closes on September 22, 2025, and the first trial is scheduled for December 8, 2025. A global settlement remains likely.

By the end of the month, the plaintiffs had moved to compel Uber to produce marketing materials related to rider safety and driver background checks, citing alleged delays. Uber contends the request is premature, stating they are actively reviewing documents. The court will address the dispute in an upcoming hearing.

November 25, 2024

An Illinois woman has added her case to the growing MDL against Uber, claiming she was sexually assaulted by a driver in Cook County in November 2022. The lawsuit alleges that Uber failed to implement adequate safety measures to protect passengers, as has been echoed in numerous similar cases within the litigation. Meanwhile, Uber continues to resist efforts to disclose internal documents. The company argues that such disclosures could harm its business operations and reveal privileged information.

November 12, 2024

Uber has moved to seal certain internal documents, claiming that disclosure would compromise its competitive position and reveal private, sensitive information. The company asserts that the materials include strategic business plans, privileged communications, and legal tactics, which, if exposed, could harm its interests. Uber is opposing public access, even in redacted form, emphasizing the distinction between proprietary data and content that may simply be embarrassing.

November 1, 2024

The Uber driver sexual assault MDL added 65 new cases since October, reaching a total of 1,411, slightly below September’s 83-case increase. Meanwhile, a comparable number of cases remain active in California state courts, as Uber’s California residency allows plaintiffs to file there. Attorneys have yet to reach a consensus on the most favorable venue, leading to continued filings in both state and federal jurisdictions.

October 22, 2024

Plaintiffs’ attorneys and Uber are at odds over whether or not to reach out to former Uber employees during the investigation. Plaintiffs maintain their actions comply with ethical standards, avoiding individuals represented by Uber’s legal team or former in-house counsel. Uber, however, warns this could violate attorney-client privilege or NDAs, as some ex-employees may be represented or soon will be. While ABA guidelines permit contact with unrepresented individuals if privilege is safeguarded, Uber’s lack of clarity on which employees held privileged information raises additional challenges.

October 6, 2024

Plaintiffs are requesting records from Ballard Partners to support allegations that Uber’s lobbying influenced legislation to help the company avoid stricter safety measures. They claim these records could reveal how Uber shaped policies to benefit its business while minimizing the importance of passenger safety. According to the plaintiffs, the documents may show that Uber had knowledge of potential safety risks and that it misrepresented its commitment to rider safety. This evidence, they argue, is vital to proving that Uber placed its profits above the well-being of its passengers.

October 5, 2024

In the discovery conference overseen by Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros this week, the focus was on disputes over Uber’s document production and privilege logs. Uber agreed to validate its review of data from 20 custodians in line with the ESI Order. Plaintiffs continue to press for an audit to confirm inclusion of hyperlinked files and metadata. Judge Cisneros ruled that employee background checks and compensation details remain undisclosed without specific justification. Discovery deadlines are being extended as parties resolve issues collaboratively. Since the previous month, 83 new cases have joined the Uber driver sexual assault MDL, now totaling 1,346 cases.