Uber Sexual Assault MDL, Lyft Records Order & Case Status

Quick Facts

• Litigation type: Federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) — not a class action
• Case name: In re: Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084
• Court: U.S. District Court, Northern District of California — Judge Charles R. Breyer
• Active cases: 3,188 as of February 2026
• Allegations: Uber allegedly failed to screen drivers and protect passengers from sexual assault
• Lyft discovery order: Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros ordered Lyft — a third party — to produce sexual misconduct records on four drivers who drove for both companies
• Settlement status: A qualified settlement fund was established December 2026; no settlement amount has been publicly announced
• First bellwether verdict: $8.5 million against Uber — February 5, 2026
• Lyft MDL approved: February 6, 2026 — separate proceeding before Judge Rita Lin

More than 3,100 people who allege they were sexually assaulted by Uber drivers have filed lawsuits consolidated into a single federal proceeding in California. A jury returned an $8.5 million verdict against Uber in the first federal trial on February 5, 2026. Days later, a judge ordered Lyft — a third party — to produce driver misconduct records relevant to four upcoming bellwether trials. No global settlement amount has been announced, but the court approved a settlement fund structure in December 2025.

What Is the Uber Sexual Assault MDL?

An MDL is not a class action. In a class action, all plaintiffs share one outcome. In an MDL, individual lawsuits are grouped in one court for pretrial efficiency, but each plaintiff keeps their own case and may receive different compensation based on their individual circumstances.

On October 4, 2023, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated federal sexual assault cases against Uber, transferring them to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. This established MDL No. 3084, In Re: Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation.

As of February 2026, the active case count for MDL No. 3084 is 3,188. Since Uber’s founding in 2009, thousands of individuals have come forward with allegations of sexual assault that occurred while using the rideshare company’s services, either as passengers or drivers.

A master complaint, filed in February 2024, alleges that Uber was aware for decades of driver assaults and failed to implement crucial safety measures like biometric checks, in-car cameras, and enhanced background screenings, prioritizing profit over safety.

A parallel California state court proceeding — the Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (JCCP) — also handles hundreds of additional state-level claims before Judge Ethan P. Schulman in San Francisco Superior Court.

The Lyft Discovery Order: What It Means

A California federal judge has ordered Lyft to hand over sexual misconduct records it has on four men who allegedly assaulted passengers while driving for Uber. U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros ordered Lyft to largely comply with a subpoena issued by four women who are plaintiffs in upcoming bellwether trials against Uber. Although Lyft is not a defendant in the case, the company must produce certain documents it may have concerning four men who drove for both ride-hailing companies.

This discovery order matters for a specific reason. Plaintiffs are gathering information from third parties like Lyft. The court is ensuring that the discovery process is thorough and efficient, focusing on the usability of data and minimizing unnecessary burdens on non-parties involved in the litigation.

If those four drivers previously drove for Lyft and Lyft had reports of prior misconduct, that information could be used to argue that their backgrounds were knowable — and that Uber should have discovered the risk before allowing them to drive. The records ordered include background checks and internal reports Lyft may hold on those individuals.

Who Is Affected?

The MDL covers people who used Uber as a passenger and were allegedly sexually assaulted or harassed by an Uber driver. The allegations span incidents going back to 2009. Both women and men have filed claims. Plaintiffs include passengers who experienced a range of conduct, from verbal harassment to physical assault.

Multidistrict litigation maintains each plaintiff’s separate case while coordinating common pretrial proceedings. Each survivor’s compensation depends on their individual circumstances, with individual damage awards based on their specific injuries.

Deadlines to file a lawsuit vary by state, typically ranging from 1 to 20 years for sexual assault claims. California allows 10 years for adult sexual assault claims with no time limit if the victim was under 18. New York allows 20 years for felony sexual assault. Texas allows 5 to 15 years depending on the offense. Anyone who believes they have a claim should consult an attorney to determine the applicable deadline in their state.

MDL Status and Legal Claims

The MDL is active and in the bellwether trial phase. Pretrial proceedings and discovery are largely complete for the initial wave of cases.

Negligence — Plaintiffs claim Uber failed to take reasonable steps to screen drivers and prevent foreseeable harm to passengers.

Failure to warn — Plaintiffs allege Uber did not tell passengers about the known risks of sexual assault on its platform, despite receiving internal reports of driver misconduct beginning as early as 2012.

Apparent agency / vicarious liability — Plaintiffs argue that because Uber presents drivers as part of its service, it can be held responsible for their conduct. The first federal bellwether jury found Uber liable under an “apparent agency” theory — that the driver was acting as Uber’s agent.

Breach of duty as a common carrier — California plaintiffs have pursued claims based on Uber’s status as a common carrier, which carries a higher duty of care to passengers.

Uber filed multiple motions to dismiss key claims in the MDL, arguing that it is not responsible for sexual assaults committed by independent contractor drivers. The court denied most of Uber’s motions, allowing the lawsuits to proceed.

Related Article: SunTrust $240M Overdraft Settlement, Eligibility & How to Claim

Bellwether Trials and Settlement Fund

On February 5, 2026, a jury awarded $8.5 million to Jaylynn Dean, a 19-year-old Oklahoma woman who alleged she was assaulted by an Uber driver in Arizona in November 2023. The jury found Uber liable under an “apparent agency” theory. Plaintiffs had sought $140 million or more, but the jury declined to award punitive damages. This was the first time Uber was found liable for failing to prevent a passenger sexual assault in federal court.

The next federal bellwether trial is scheduled to begin in North Carolina on April 12, 2026.

On December 23, 2025, the court approved the creation of a qualified settlement fund requested by the plaintiffs. Though no proposed settlement amount has been disclosed, this indicates that a global settlement may move forward in the near future. No settlement is open for claims at this time.

In the California state court, a jury found Uber negligent in a September 2025 trial but determined the negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff’s harm, resulting in a verdict for Uber.

Lyft’s Separate MDL

On February 6, 2026, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation approved a separate Lyft MDL in the Northern District of California before Judge Rita Lin, initially consolidating 17 federal cases with hundreds more expected to join.

A motion was filed in October 2025 for Lyft lawsuits to be grouped together in their own MDL. The motion noted that “hundreds or thousands” of Lyft lawsuits could be filed. That MDL is now established and is separate from the Uber proceeding.

Consumer Rights and Support Resources

People who have experienced sexual assault by a rideshare driver have the right to pursue an individual lawsuit against the company. Unlike a class action, the MDL preserves each plaintiff’s right to seek compensation based on their specific circumstances.

There is no settlement claim form available. Anyone seeking to join MDL No. 3084 must file their own lawsuit, typically through an attorney, who can then seek transfer into the MDL.

If you or someone you know experienced sexual assault, support is available 24/7 through RAINN at 1-800-656-4673 or at rainn.org. RAINN connects survivors with local resources, crisis counseling, and information about the legal process.

Key Dates

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an MDL? 

An MDL is a federal proceeding that groups similar lawsuits in one court for shared discovery and pretrial proceedings. Unlike a class action, each plaintiff keeps their own case. Compensation varies by individual circumstances, not a fixed payout shared by all members.

What allegations are included in the Uber MDL?

 Plaintiffs allege they were sexually assaulted or harassed by Uber drivers and that Uber failed to conduct adequate background checks, ignored prior reports of misconduct, and prioritized growth over passenger safety. Incidents go back to at least 2009.

Who is affected by this MDL? 

Passengers who used Uber and were allegedly sexually assaulted or harassed by a driver may be eligible to file a lawsuit. There is no geographic restriction — plaintiffs have filed from states across the country. Consult an attorney to determine whether your specific situation qualifies and whether your state’s filing deadline has passed.

What is the Lyft discovery order? 

On February 27, 2026, Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros ordered Lyft — which is not a defendant — to produce sexual misconduct records on four drivers who drove for both Uber and Lyft. The records may show whether those drivers had prior misconduct reports before driving for Uber.

Is there a settlement? 

No global settlement has been announced. The court approved a qualified settlement fund structure in December 2025, which is a procedural step that may eventually allow a global settlement to be distributed. No claim filing period is open as of February 28, 2026.

Am I eligible for compensation?

 Eligibility depends on your individual facts — what occurred, when it occurred, and your state’s applicable filing deadline. There is no standardized payout. Each plaintiff’s compensation, if any, depends on their individual case. Consult a licensed attorney to evaluate your situation.

Is a claim form required? 

There is no claim form to submit. To participate in MDL No. 3084, a plaintiff must file their own individual lawsuit, usually through an attorney, who handles the filing and seeks transfer into the MDL.

What is the claim deadline? 

No settlement deadline exists. State statutes of limitations for sexual assault vary from 1 to 20 years depending on the state. Missing this deadline can bar a claim entirely. An attorney can identify the specific deadline that applies to your situation.

Last Updated: February 28, 2026

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. MDL status, litigation developments, and settlement eligibility depend on specific facts and applicable law. For questions regarding this MDL, consult official MDL resources through the federal court PACER system or the MDL centralized case management office. For questions regarding settlement, consult official settlement resources or a qualified attorney. For support related to sexual assault, contact RAINN (1-800-656-4673) or visit rainn.org. Information in this article is current as of the last update date and may change as the MDL proceeds.

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah