Uber Technologies Inc. has petitioned a California federal judge to move the majority of bellwether trials in the ongoing multidistrict litigation (MDL) accusing the company of failing to prevent sexual assaults by its drivers. The request is grounded in Uber’s forum selection clause, which mandates that personal injury claims be heard in the federal or state courts of the jurisdiction where the alleged incident occurred.

Forum Clause at Center of Legal Battle

On Friday, Uber filed a motion asking U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer to transfer 13 of 20 bellwether cases to various federal districts nationwide, including courts in Texas, Illinois, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia. According to Uber, its terms of use stipulate that claims must be resolved “exclusively in the state or federal courts in the state in which the incident or accident occurred.”

"Federal law does not allow plaintiffs to renege on the parties' forum-selection agreement," the company asserted. "To the contrary, the 'strong federal policy in favor of enforcing forum-selection clauses' mandates transfer to the agreed-upon forums." Uber emphasized that no “extraordinary circumstances” exist to justify keeping the cases in the Northern District of California, where the MDL is based.

Plaintiffs Push for Unified Venue

Despite the company’s argument, plaintiffs in 16 of the 20 bellwether cases have sought to keep the trials in the MDL’s current venue. The plaintiffs argue for centralized proceedings in the Northern District of California, a strategy commonly employed in MDLs to streamline litigation and conserve judicial resources.

Uber countered that the plaintiffs are bound by the terms they accepted upon using the platform, which include the forum selection clause. “Uber's terms of use — including the forum-selection clause — constitute a valid and enforceable contract, which each relevant plaintiff executed,” the company said. “Accordingly, federal law presumptively requires transfer to the forum specified.”

Bellwether Trials Signal Next Phase

The MDL accuses Uber of ignoring widespread reports of driver misconduct since at least 2014. Plaintiffs contend the company failed to implement safeguards such as in-vehicle cameras and comprehensive background checks, contributing to a pattern of assaults nationwide.

With fact discovery nearing completion, the MDL is preparing for 20 bellwether trials. The court has already identified an “initial wave” of six cases, scheduled to proceed later this year. These early trials will likely set the tone for settlement talks or further litigation strategies.

Legal Teams on Both Sides

The plaintiffs are represented by a coalition of law firms including Girard Sharp LLP, Peiffer Wolf Carr Kane Conway & Wise LLP, Chaffin Luhana LLP, Anapol Weiss, Walkup Melodia Kelly & Schoenberger, and Nigh Goldenberg Raso & Vaughn PLLC.

Uber is defended by legal heavyweights from Kirkland & Ellis LLP, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, and Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP.

As of Monday, representatives from both sides had not responded to requests for comment.

Case Information

Case Title: In re: Uber Technologies Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation
Case Number: 3:23-md-03084
Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California