Uber Sexual Assault MDL, Third Bellwether Trial Ends in Settlement in Jane Doe QLF 001 v. Uber Technologies Inc.

Uber Technologies Inc. has settled the third federal bellwether case in the multidistrict litigation over alleged sexual assaults by Uber drivers. The settlement was announced on October 2, 2026, less than 48 hours after a jury was selected and before opening statements, which were scheduled for October 5. The terms are confidential.

This was one plaintiff’s individual lawsuit. It was not a class action, and the settlement does not create a fund, an official settlement website or a claim form for anyone else. Nearly 5,000 other cases are still pending in the federal MDL. This article explains what happened, how an MDL works, which legal theories and laws are involved, what the earlier trials showed, and what the settlement does and does not mean.

If you or someone you know has been sexually assaulted, support is available. The RAINN National Sexual Assault Hotline is free and confidential at 800-656-4673.

Jane Doe QLF 001 v. Uber Technologies Inc.: Quick Facts

Detail	Information
Bellwether case	Jane Doe QLF 001 v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al.
Case number	1:26-cv-01694
Trial court	U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
MDL	In re: Uber Technologies Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084
MDL case number	3:23-md-03084
MDL court	U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
MDL judge	U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer
Alleged incident	Ride on June 9, 2020, starting in Arlington, Texas, headed to Cresson, Texas
Driver	Victor Huynh Le, convicted of sexual assault in Tarrant County in 2022 and sentenced to 11 years in prison, according to plaintiff’s counsel and press reports
Jury selected	September 30, 2026
Opening statements were set for	October 5, 2026
Settlement announced	October 2, 2026
Settlement amount	Confidential. Not publicly disclosed
Type of case	Individual personal injury lawsuit within an MDL (not a class action)
Official settlement website	None
Claim form and claim deadline	None
Global MDL settlement	None announced

What Is the Uber Sexual Assault MDL (MDL No. 3084)?

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created MDL No. 3084 in October 2023. An MDL is created under a federal statute (28 U.S.C. § 1407) that lets related federal lawsuits be transferred to one judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings, such as discovery and rulings on common legal questions. Here, the cases went to Judge Breyer in the Northern District of California.

The plaintiffs allege Uber knew for years that some drivers were assaulting riders and failed to do enough to prevent it. Their claims point to Uber’s background checks, the lack of in-car cameras and other safety measures they say would have reduced the risk. As of October 1, 2026, nearly 5,000 lawsuits were pending in the federal MDL. Additional cases are moving through California state court, including a coordinated proceeding there.

MDL vs. class action

An MDL is not a class action. In a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, a court certifies a class and a small number of representatives sue on behalf of everyone in it, usually ending in one settlement with one claims process. In an MDL, each plaintiff keeps an individual case with their own facts, evidence and damages. The cases are grouped only for efficiency. That is why one settlement or verdict does not decide anyone else’s case.

What is a bellwether trial?

A bellwether trial is an early test case chosen from a larger group of similar lawsuits. The results show both sides how juries respond to common evidence and defenses, and they often shape settlement talks. A bellwether verdict is not binding in the other cases.

Why was the trial in Texas?

Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach (1998), an MDL judge generally cannot keep a transferred case for trial on his own. Cases are sent back to the court where they could originally have been filed, unless the parties agree otherwise. That is why bellwether trials in this MDL have been held in other federal districts, such as Arizona, North Carolina and Texas.

What Was the Third Uber Bellwether Case About?

According to reporting on the complaint, Jane Doe QLF 001 alleged she was sexually assaulted, harassed, battered or otherwise attacked by an Uber driver during a ride on June 9, 2020. The trip started in Arlington, Texas, and was headed to Cresson, Texas, and the incident occurred in Tarrant County. Reporting says she first sued in Parker County state court, and her case entered the MDL in December 2024.

Plaintiffs’ counsel said the case centered on Uber’s driver background check process. The driver had a pending sexual assault charge at the time that Uber’s check allegedly did not flag. A criminal conviction of the driver does not by itself make Uber civilly liable. The plaintiff still had to prove her claims against the company under the applicable law.

Pretrial rulings and defenses

Before trial, Judge Breyer barred Uber from presenting evidence about a military background check the company said failed to show the pending charge. According to plaintiff’s counsel, Uber also agreed not to contest that the assault occurred, which narrowed the trial to whether Uber was legally responsible. Uber’s defenses included that the plaintiff was not the account holder who requested the ride, which it used to argue she could not show she relied on its safety representations.

What Legal Theories and Laws Are in Play in the Uber Cases?

Uber sexual assault cases rest mostly on state law, and the details can change depending on which state’s law applies. The theories commonly raised include:

• Vicarious liability (agency). The plaintiff argues the driver acted as Uber’s agent, so Uber is responsible for his conduct. Uber argues its drivers are independent contractors. The first bellwether jury accepted an agency theory.
• Negligence, including negligent hiring, screening, retention and supervision. The plaintiff argues Uber failed to use reasonable care in screening and monitoring drivers. These claims turn on what Uber knew or should have known and whether its failures were a substantial factor in causing the harm.
• Misrepresentation and consumer protection claims. Plaintiffs argue Uber’s public safety messaging misled riders. Reliance and who requested the ride can matter here, which is why Uber raised the account-holder defense.
• Product liability theories. Some plaintiffs argue the app and its safety features were defectively designed. Courts have had to decide how traditional product law applies to a ride-hailing platform, and results can vary.
• Battery and related intentional torts, which were at issue in the second bellwether.
• Punitive damages. These require a higher showing, such as malice or conscious indifference, and are governed by state law. The first bellwether jury declined to award them.

Other laws shape the background:

• Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.). Federal law governs how background check reports are obtained and used in screening decisions. Uber’s driver screening relies on third-party background checks.
• State rules on ride-hailing companies. Many states, including Texas (Occupations Code, Chapter 2402), regulate transportation network companies, including requirements for driver background checks. Compliance with such rules does not necessarily shield a company from negligence claims.
• Arbitration. Ride-hailing terms of service often include arbitration clauses. A federal law enacted in 2022, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (9 U.S.C. §§ 401-402), lets a person who alleges a sexual assault dispute choose to go to court instead of arbitration in covered cases.
• Statutes of limitations. Filing deadlines are set by state law and vary widely. Texas, for example, has a general two-year deadline for personal injury claims, but a separate Texas statute allows much longer periods for civil claims based on certain sexual offenses. Other states have their own rules.

How Did the Uber Bellwether Settlement Happen?

A jury was selected in the Western District of Texas on September 30, 2026. The trial was expected to last about three weeks. On October 2, less than 48 hours after jury selection, plaintiffs’ counsel announced the case had settled. According to counsel’s release, Judge Breyer was to preside over the trial.

Kevin Queenan of Queenan Law Firm P.C. was the plaintiff’s lead trial lawyer. The MDL co-lead counsel were Rachel B. Abrams of Peiffer Wolf Carr Kane Conway & Wise LLP, Sarah R. London of Girard Sharp LLC and Roopal P. Luhana of Chaffin Luhana LLP. The plaintiff’s team also included Alexandra M. Walsh of Anapol Weiss, Deborah Chang of Chang Klein LLP and Khaldoun Baghdadi of Walkup Melodia Kelly & Schoenberger.

In a statement released with the announcement, the plaintiffs’ side said the settlement came from the sustained work of MDL leadership and the trial team, and that the plaintiff had been prepared to tell her story to a jury a second time. The MDL co-leads also called on Uber to pursue a global resolution for the thousands of other survivors. Uber has not publicly agreed to that, and we did not find an Uber statement on the settlement in the sources we reviewed.

What Happened in the Earlier Uber Trials?

The third case was supposed to be the next data point after two federal trials that went very differently, plus a state trial in California.

Trial	Result
First federal bellwether (Arizona), February 2026	A jury awarded Jaylynn Dean $8.5 million in compensatory damages. Jurors rejected claims that Uber was negligent in designing or carrying out its safety measures and declined punitive damages, but found Uber responsible because the driver was acting as its agent.
Second federal bellwether (North Carolina), April 2026	A jury awarded $5,000 after finding a driver committed battery by touching a passenger’s leg during a 2019 ride. Uber emphasized that the jury found battery, not sexual assault.
California state court trial	Jurors found Uber was negligent in failing to protect the passenger but concluded the negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the assault, so no damages were awarded.
Third federal bellwether (Texas), October 2026	Settled confidentially after jury selection. No verdict.

The results so far are mixed. Facts, evidence, applicable law and damages differ from case to case, so neither the verdicts nor the settlement set a standard value for other Uber cases.

Does the Settlement Mean Uber Admitted Liability?

Not based on the publicly reported terms. Plaintiff’s counsel said Uber agreed it would not contest that the assault occurred. That removes a dispute over whether the event happened, but it is not an admission that Uber is legally responsible for the driver’s conduct or that its background checks caused the assault. The full agreement, including release language and payment terms, has not been made public. Settlements generally resolve a case without a court finding of liability, and this one did not reach a verdict.

How Much Will Jane Doe QLF 001 Receive?

The amount is confidential. No verified dollar figure has been published, and it would be inaccurate to estimate it from the $8.5 million Arizona verdict or the $5,000 North Carolina verdict. Those were different cases with different facts.

What Does the Uber Bellwether Settlement Mean for Other Plaintiffs?

Plenty of people will read this settlement as a sign of a coming global deal. That would be speculation. What the facts show is narrower:

• The settlement is private. Because the amount is confidential, it cannot be used to estimate what other cases are worth.
• It resolves only one case. The nearly 5,000 other pending MDL cases are unaffected.
• No verdict means no new legal guidance. The third trial would have tested Uber’s defenses on its background check process and its reliance argument. That did not happen.
• More trials may follow. A fourth federal bellwether trial has been reported as scheduled for later in 2026. Check the MDL docket for the current trial calendar before relying on that date.
• Nothing forces a global settlement. One bellwether outcome does not compel either side to settle the rest, and the litigation may continue through more trials, motions and negotiations.

Can Other Uber Passengers File a Claim for Compensation?

The settlement does not create a general claim process. Other people who reported assaults are not automatically entitled to a payment, and no universal deadline, payout amount or online claim form has been announced. Be cautious of websites or messages promising guaranteed compensation from this settlement.

The MDL is still open, and cases continue to be filed. Whether any particular person can still sue depends on facts like where and when the ride took place, the state’s filing deadline and the specific claims. Those deadlines vary by state, and some states have special rules for sexual assault claims. Anyone considering a claim should talk to a licensed attorney soon. This article cannot tell you whether you qualify.

For more background on the coordinated litigation, see our related report: Uber Sexual Assault MDL, Lyft Records Order & Case Status.

What Happens Next in the Uber Litigation?

Jane Doe QLF 001’s case is settled, but the broader MDL remains a separate matter. Future developments may include additional bellwether trials, court rulings, settlement discussions and changes to the schedule. Because the settlement terms are confidential, public information about this case may remain limited. Readers following the litigation should check the court docket for the individual case and for the MDL, including any dismissal or settlement paperwork filed in the Texas case.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Uber Sexual Assault MDL Settlement

Is there an Uber sexual assault class action settlement I can claim money from?

No. The MDL is made up of individual lawsuits, and the October 2026 settlement resolved one plaintiff’s case. There is no class settlement fund, no settlement website and no claim form.

Did Uber settle the third bellwether sexual assault lawsuit?

Yes. Uber settled Jane Doe QLF 001 v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al. on October 2, 2026, less than 48 hours after jury selection and before opening statements.

How much did Uber pay in the third bellwether settlement?

The amount has not been made public. Plaintiff’s counsel said the terms are confidential.

What is the Uber MDL case number?

In re: Uber Technologies Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, Case No. 3:23-md-03084, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The settled bellwether is Jane Doe QLF 001 v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-01694, in the Western District of Texas.

Does the settlement mean Uber admitted fault?

Not based on public information. According to plaintiff’s counsel, Uber agreed not to contest that the assault occurred, but that is different from admitting legal responsibility. We did not find a public Uber statement on the settlement.

Is the entire Uber MDL settled?

No. The announced agreement resolves one individual case. No global settlement has been announced.

How many cases are in the Uber MDL?

Nearly 5,000 lawsuits were pending as of October 1, 2026.

Who is the judge in the Uber MDL?

U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer of the Northern District of California oversees the MDL.

What were the earlier Uber bellwether results?

A federal jury in Arizona awarded $8.5 million in February 2026. A federal jury in North Carolina awarded $5,000 in April 2026. Each result applied only to that plaintiff’s case.

Does a driver’s criminal conviction mean Uber is automatically liable?

No. The driver’s conviction concerns his own criminal conduct. A civil claim against Uber requires proof under the applicable law, such as agency or negligence.

Bottom Line

The third Uber bellwether ended before a jury heard a word of opening statements. Uber had already lost one bellwether by a large verdict and another by a very small one, and it chose to settle this one rather than risk a third result. The confidential terms mean the broader litigation remains unsettled, with nearly 5,000 federal cases still waiting and no claim process for anyone else.

Disclaimer: I am a legal content researcher, not a practicing attorney. This article is general information, not legal advice. The settlement terms are confidential, and findings in individual cases should not be generalized to every lawsuit in the MDL. Statutes of limitations and other rules vary by state and change over time. For advice about your own situation, consult a licensed attorney.

About the Author

Israr Ahmad is the founder and legal content researcher at AllAboutLawyer.com, a legal information site covering consumer class action lawsuits and settlements.

Sources

1. Co-lead plaintiffs’ counsel press release, “Uber Settles Background Check Sexual Assault Case Less Than 48 Hours After Jury Selection” (PR Newswire, October 2, 2026): https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/uber-settles-background-check-sexual-assault-case-less-than-48-hours-after-jury-selection-302897577.html
2. Bloomberg Law, “Uber Settles Bellwether Sexual Assault Case Before Third Trial” (October 2026): https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/uber-settles-bellwether-sexual-assault-case-before-third-trial
3. Law360, “Uber Settles Bellwether In Sex Assault MDL Before Trial” (Rae Ann Varona, October 2, 2026)
4. AboutLawsuits.com, “Uber Sexual Assault Settlement Reached Before Bellwether Trial Begins” (Russell Maas, October 6, 2026)
5. Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, “USA: Uber settles third test case in federal litigation over alleged sexual assaults by drivers” (October 2026)
6. Docket listing, Jane Doe QLF 001 v. Uber Technologies Inc., No. 1:26-cv-01694 (W.D. Tex.), via Justia: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/texas/txwdce/1%3A2026cv01694/1172916450
7. Federal court order transferring Jane Doe QLF 001’s case to the Western District of Texas, via Justia: https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3%3A2024cv08783/440666/12
8. Reuters, “Uber ordered to pay $8.5 million in trial over driver sexual assault claims” (February 5, 2026): https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/uber-ordered-pay-85-million-key-trial-over-driver-sex-assault-claims-2026-02-05/
9. Associated Press, “Federal jury finds Uber liable for actions of driver who grabbed passenger’s inner thigh” (April 2026): https://apnews.com/article/636ebfe6acbedea4189bcf1e7ba43724
10. 28 U.S.C. § 1407 (multidistrict litigation); Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23; Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523 U.S. 26 (1998)
11. Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.; Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021, 9 U.S.C. §§ 401-402
12. Texas Occupations Code, Chapter 2402 (transportation network companies); Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, ch. 16 (limitations)

By Israr Ahmad, Founder and Legal Content Researcher, AllAboutLawyer.com | Last updated: October 10, 2026