Uber Sexual Assault Lawsuit: The Bellwether Trials and the Court's Orders in MDL No. 3084
The federal Uber passenger sexual assault lawsuits are gathered in one multidistrict litigation, MDL No. 3084, before Judge Charles R. Breyer in the Northern District of California. The Panel's report of October 1, 2026 lists 4,916 actions pending in it. Juries have decided bellwether trials, and the court requires each plaintiff to serve ride records and a fact sheet on a set schedule. This page quotes those orders and judgments, and the checker below reads them for your situation.
It states no settlement: no document read for this page describes a settlement of the MDL, and each judgment it quotes is one case's verdict.
Check your situation against the court's orders
Pick where your case stands and the ride record you have to see what the court's orders say about it, in their own words. Then add up the costs you can document, to bring one figure to a lawyer.
Choose where your case stands and the ride record you have to see what the court's orders say about it.
Add up your documented costs
Enter what you can show with bills, pay records or receipts, such as counseling or medical care. The total is only the sum of what you enter.
Dollars, with or without commas or a dollar sign. Leave a field blank if it does not apply.
This is not an estimate of a claim or a settlement. It adds no pain and suffering, takes out no fees or liens, and says nothing about what any claim could be worth. It is the total of your own figures, to bring to a lawyer.
What the Uber sexual assault lawsuit claims
The court's case page describes the MDL as one that centralizes passenger cases “alleging that Uber failed to implement adequate safety precautions (e.g., background checks, training, safety measures, and complaint-response practices), resulting in passengers being sexually assaulted or harassed by Uber drivers.” (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, case page for MDL No. 3084 (read Oct. 6, 2026))
These are claims and allegations, and the company contests them. A verdict in one bellwether case decides that case, not the others.
The bellwether trials
Bellwether trials are early trials of chosen cases, held to test the claims before a jury. In the first, the court entered this judgment: “In accordance with the jury’s verdict, judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff and against defendants for $8 ,500,000.00 .” (Judgment, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 5203, at 1 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 6, 2026)) That is a judgment of $8,500,000.00 for one plaintiff, on one jury's verdict.
Before the second, the court gave a tentative ruling on a key question, whether the company is held to a common carrier's duty: “the Court tentatively rules that Plaintiff WHB 823’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Common Carrier Status and Liability (dkt. 5468) is GRANTED and that Uber’s Motion for Summary Judgment (dkt. 5475) is DENIED .” (Pretrial Order No. 42, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 5670, at 1 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2026)) And it set the trial: “The WHB 823 trial will begin in Charlotte, NC with jury selection on April 14, 2026.” (Pretrial Order No. 42, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 5670, at 1 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2026))
In that case the court entered this judgment: “In accordance with the jury’s verdict, judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff and against defendants for $5,000.00.” (Judgment (WHB 823), In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 5932, at 2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2026)) That is a judgment of $5,000.00 for one plaintiff, on another jury's verdict. The two amounts differ, and neither is a measure of any other claim.
A later bellwether case did not go to a jury. The court's case page records, for a trial set to start that day: “Jury Trial not held on 10/5/2026. Case Settled.” (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, case page for MDL No. 3084 (read Oct. 6, 2026)) No document read for this page states the terms.
The ride records and fact sheet every plaintiff must serve
The court's fact sheet order begins with the ride: “Plaintiffs will either submit bona fide ride receipts or the ride information detailed in PTO No. 5” (Pretrial Order No. 10, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 348, at 3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024)) For cases filed later, that is due “within 14 days of filing, transfer, or removal to this Court for all cases filed, transferred, or removed after February 1, 2024.” (Pretrial Order No. 10, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 348, at 3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024))
Then the Plaintiff Fact Sheet, a set of questions about the plaintiff, the ride and the harm: “each Plaintiff must complete and submit a PFS and execute applicable Authorizations within 30 days of the case being filed in” (Pretrial Order No. 10, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 348, at 6 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024)) the MDL.
If the other side says a fact sheet is incomplete, the “deficient party will have thirty (30) days to correct the alleged deficiency(ies).” (Pretrial Order No. 10, In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, MDL No. 3084, No. 3:23-md-3084-CRB, ECF No. 348, at 7 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2024)) So the dates matter.
The records a claim rests on
Keep the ride receipt or the account's ride history, with the date, time and route, and any messages to or from the company about the ride or the report.
Keep any police report and report number, medical and counseling records with their dates, and the bills. A claim is built on the dates, so keep the records together and in order.
Where the federal cases are
The MDL is No. 3084, before Judge Charles R. Breyer, master docket 3:23-md-3084. The Panel's report lists the date transferred as October 4, 2023. The court's case page names it: “Case Number: 3:23-md-03084-CRB” (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, case page for MDL No. 3084 (read Oct. 6, 2026))
The Panel's report of October 1, 2026 lists 4,916 actions now pending in it, and 5,221 in total since it began. The figures are the report's, as of its date, and this page prints them with that date.
What this page does not say about money
The two judgments above are what two juries decided in two cases. No document read for this page describes a settlement of the MDL, so this page states none and does not estimate what any claim is worth.
What the checker above does is add up the costs you can document, such as counseling or medical care, so you have one figure to bring to a lawyer. It is the sum of what you enter and nothing else.
Talking to a lawyer about an Uber sexual assault lawsuit
This site is not a law firm, does not refer anyone to a lawyer, and cannot say what a claim would recover. The questions that decide a claim are a lawyer's: whether it was filed in time under the state's law, whether the ride record and fact sheet were served as the court requires, and how the bellwether rulings bear on it.
Bring the ride record, any police report, the medical and counseling records with their dates, your record of costs, and the orders this page quotes. You decide what to share and when.