Uber Requests Summary Judgment in Text Message Spam Class Action Lawsuit

Uber recently filed a motion for summary judgment in a TCPA Class action lawsuit alleging the ride sharing service sent text message spam to drivers.

Uber Technologies Inc. told a California federal judge that the drivers had each previously given consent to being contacted by Uber and failed to properly opt out of notifications. Uber said the prospective drivers had each provided their phone numbers to Uber.

However, prospective drivers and current drivers continued to receive texts even though they requested that the text messages end.

Uber claims that the drivers indisputably consented to such texts and kept receiving the texts because they failed to text the word “STOP” to opt out of the texts as instructed, so no TCPA violation had actually occurred.

The company said it is entitled to summary judgment in the text message spam class action lawsuit.

Plaintiffs Justin B., Jonathan G., James L. and Jennifer R. initially filed the lawsuit and are representing the proposed class of a group of drivers who gave Uber their information as potential drivers for the company.

Plaintiff Sandeep P. is leading a second proposed class of individuals who allege they never provided information to Uber or were not connected to Uber’s service at all, yet they received automated text message spam from Uber urging them to sign up with the company as a driver.

Uber claimed that the messages Sandeep received were actually confirmations to let him know that a friend referred him to the company and provided his phone number to Uber as a potential driver for the company. Uber maintained that since the messages were not initiated by the company and the numbers were not automatically generated, no text message spam TCPA violation had actually occurred.

The text message spam lawsuit was initially filed in December 2014 and part of the claims were dismissed in early 2015. U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar ruled that the messages sent by Uber did not constitute telemarketing, but the claims about the group’s consent to receive texts was allowed to stay for further investigation.

Uber had previously asked Judge Tigar to issue a stay TCPA class action lawsuit while the D.C. Circuit was hearing a case that would potentially affect how TCPA rules were applied. Also, Uber cited a related case of Spokeo Inc. v. Robins which is set to receive a Supreme Court ruling that will address who has standing to bring forth claims when there is evidence of a statutory violation but no actual harm to individuals.

Judge Tigar refused to grant Uber’s request to pause the lawsuit, saying that the Spokeo case did not apply to the current TCPA class action lawsuit, and that the decision in the D.C. Circuit Court would not be available for a long time.

In Uber’s recent motion for summary judgment, it claimed that the FCC and other courts have ruled that individuals who provide their phone number to a third party counts as prior consent to be texted or called by the third party, and that in the initial proposed class (not including Sandeep and his proposed class), all claimed they were interested in driving for Uber and consented to Uber’s messaging when they signed up.

Uber further claimed that each plaintiff received messages that they could unsubscribe by texting back the work “stop” to no longer receive messages. However, Uber claims that the plaintiffs texted other phrases back.

Uber said that Jennifer’s message back following an Uber text said “can you please take me off of this list?” and Justin said “it’s Halloween idiot stop texting this number.” Had they simply texted “stop,” Uber claimed, the word would have revoked prior consent and the text message spam would have immediately stopped.

As for Sandeep and his proposed class, Uber claimed that the driver referral system allows friends to provide the phone number of a friend who may be interested as a driver. Uber then sends an introductory text with the referrer’s name and provides information, Uber claimed. Since Uber did not initiate the text, the company claimed this was not considered a TCPA violation.

The Uber Text Message Spam TCPA Class Action Lawsuit is Lathrop et al., v. Uber Technologies Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-5678, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: On June 14, 2017, Uber and Lathrop told the Court that they have agreed to settle the TCPA class action lawsuit. Terms of the settlement will remain confidential until the parties submit the draft settlement and motion for preliminary approval to the court, according to the parties’ joint notice.

Join a Free Uber Text Message Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you have received unwanted or unsolicited text messages from Uber, you may be eligible to participate in a free Uber class action lawsuit investigation.

Join the Investigation Now