Class Action
In re Tesla ADAS Litigation
In re Tesla Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Litigation
Where it stands
Consumer-fraud class action alleging Tesla misrepresented that its vehicles had the hardware necessary for full self-driving and would achieve autonomy through software updates. On August 18–19, 2025, Judge Rita Lin certified two California classes, finding common questions predominated given Tesla's direct-to-consumer marketing and the materiality of autonomy claims; she declined to certify a proposed Enhanced Autopilot class. This is a marketing/consumer-protection case rather than a personal-injury case, but it is the principal certified class action over Tesla's driver-automation claims.
Key ruling
August 2025 class certification order (N.D. Cal., Lin, J.) permitting California Full Self-Driving purchasers to proceed as a class on misrepresentation theories.
What is not confirmed
Case number is reported as 22-cv-05240 (N.D. Cal.); the '3:' division prefix and the September 14, 2022 filing date should be confirmed against PACER. Lead plaintiffs' counsel not identified in the sources reviewed.The record
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- Case number
- 3:22-cv-05240
- Filed
- 2022-09-14
- Defendants
- Tesla, Inc.
- Plaintiffs
- Certified classes of California purchasers of the Full Self-Driving package (May 19, 2017–July 31, 2024, who opted out of arbitration) and purchasers of FSD between October 20, 2016 and May 19, 2017
- Technology at issue
- Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised) / Autopilot
- Relief sought
- Damages and restitution for California FSD purchasers
Claims pleaded
Sources (3)
- Tesla must face class action over self-driving claims, U.S. judge rulesThe Globe and Mail / Reuters · 2025-08-19
- Tesla Drivers Can Pursue Class Action Over Self-Driving Claims, Judge RulesU.S. News / Reuters · 2025-08-19
- Drivers sue Tesla for alleged false advertising of Autopilot and FSD softwareTechCrunch · 2022-09-15
This page describes a publicly filed case. This site is not counsel on this matter, nothing here is legal advice, and the allegations described are allegations unless a court has said otherwise.