Uber Ordered to Disclose Sexual Assault Data in Mass Tort Litigation

A federal judge has ordered Uber to disclose safety report data related to sexual assaults and misconduct by its drivers in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in California. This ruling is a major setback for Uber, which had argued that data from less severe incidents was unreliable and irrelevant.

Who's Affected: Passengers who have been victims of sexual assault or harassment by Uber drivers.

Reason for Lawsuit: Plaintiffs allege that Uber knew or should have known about the widespread issue of sexual misconduct by its drivers and failed to take sufficient measures to protect passengers.

Court: The multidistrict litigation is taking place in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Ride-hailing giant Uber has suffered a significant legal setback as a federal judge ordered the company to produce safety report data related to sexual assaults and misconduct committed by its drivers.

The ruling comes as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in California federal court, consolidating hundreds of cases alleging sexual assault and harassment by Uber drivers. Plaintiffs contend that Uber knew or should have known about the widespread problem but failed to take adequate measures to protect passengers.

Click Here for a FREE Claim Review

A key point of contention in the case centers on the scope of safety report data that Uber should be required to produce. The company argued that its safety reports focused primarily on the most severe incidents of sexual misconduct and that data from other categories was unreliable and irrelevant. 

Court Orders Uber to Reveal Full Extent of Sexual Assault Reports

However, the court disagreed and granted a motion to compel discovery, ordering Uber to produce safety reports dating back to 2017. The data, which includes in-app reports, social media mentions, and reports made to law enforcement, is expected to provide crucial evidence about the extent of sexual assault and harassment incidents on the Uber platform.

As the judge noted in the order issued earlier this month, “Plaintiffs argue that the documents related to, and the data underlying, the Safety Reports bear on what Uber knew, when it had notice of widespread sexual assault and harassment committed by its drivers against its passengers, and what response the company undertook.” 

Click Here for a FREE Claim Review from an Uber or Lyft Sexual Assault Lawyer

Judge Rejects Uber's Argument That Safety Reports Are Unreliable

Uber had previously argued that its safety reports focused solely on the five most serious categories of sexual misconduct and that data from other categories was unreliable. However, the court rejected this argument, finding that the broader data set is relevant to determining Uber's knowledge of the problem and its response to it.

“The existence of patterns based on the incidents reported may tend to show whether Uber disregarded the risk of sexual assault and misconduct on a systematic basis in particular circumstances where passengers may be especially vulnerable to victimization,” the judge stated.

The judge ordered Uber to produce safety reports involving sexual assault or misconduct that occurred between January 2017 and December 2020. This includes reports made through the Uber app, social media, and to law enforcement. Notably, the court found that while Uber reviewed over 800,000 user reports during this period, the company's focus on only the most severe incidents was insufficient.

The MDL, which consolidates cases from across the country, represents a significant legal challenge for Uber. The company has previously faced criticism for its handling of safety issues, and the disclosure of safety report data could lead to further scrutiny of its practices.

Have you been sexually assaulted or harassed by your Uber driver? Click Here for a FREE Claim Review from an Uber or Lyft Sexual Assault Lawyer.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: In re: Uber Technologies Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigatin
• MDL Number: 3:23-md-03084
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California