Text Spam Class Action Lawsuit Stalled by Uber

Ride sharing giant, Uber, has been accused of stalling discovery in a text spam class action lawsuit against them.

A proposed class of potential Uber drivers claim that Uber is unfairly blocking necessary discovery in this text spam class action lawsuit that claims the company violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act was enacted in 1991 to protect consumers from telemarketers and other types of solicitors who do not have permission to contact them.

It has been extended to sending unsolicited text messages. Those who have received unwanted text messages from a company may be eligible for $500 – $1000 per text message.

Uber’s Text Spam Class Action Lawsuit

In an opposition brief from June 8, Uber called out this text spam class action lawsuit and labeled it “unmeritorious”. Uber also claimed that the plaintiffs were trying to prolong it by raising “irrelevant” discovery disputes.

However, the proposed class disagrees. They say that they are entitled to additional fact and expert discovery to establish the “full factual record”.

The plaintiffs say, “In short, Uber obstructs discovery that it believes does not support its motion for summary judgment based on its misguided view that it can cut the litigation short by depriving plaintiffs of the facts they need to litigate the case.”

The main issue in this text spam class action lawsuit is that Uber allegedly sent unwanted text messages to potential drivers after they filled out, but never sent, a driver application.

Another class of plaintiffs claim that Uber got their information from a third party and sent those potential drivers unwanted text messages as well.

Uber argues that those potential drivers did not properly opt out of receiving text messages but the plaintiffs say that by the very nature of not completing the application, they are communicating they do not want to receive text messages.

The plaintiffs recently argued, “The evidence gathered to date, albeit incomplete due to Uber’s obstruction, is wholly consistent with the allegations in the complaint and with the court’s ruling: The Class B plaintiffs aborted their applications to drive with Uber and, thus, did not ‘provide’ their cellular numbers to Uber … and did not explicitly consent.”

The plaintiffs claim that Uber has not done a good job in answering the claims that the plaintiffs have made and that because of this, more discovery in this text spam class action lawsuit is needed.
Allegedly, Uber’s corporate designee struggled in court to answer questions related to the text messaging program and how text messages are sent to potential drivers. The plaintiffs, therefore, are calling for more discovery in this area. Uber contends that they have not violated the TCPA because the messages weren’t actually initiated by Uber and that they were not sent because a number had been generated randomly by an automated dialing service.The Uber Text Spam Class Action Lawsuit is Lathrop et al. v. Uber Technologies Inc., Case No 3:14-cv-05678, 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 haveagreed 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 TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were contacted on your cell phone by a company via an unsolicited text message (text spam) or prerecorded voice message (robocall), you may be eligible for compensation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now