Uber Drops Driverless Car Tests in California After Fatal Crash in Arizona
If Uber chooses to restart its testing program in California, "Uber must apply for a new vehicle testing permit," state motor vehicle regulators said.
March 27, 2018 at 05:44 PM
4 minute read
An Uber car. Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi / ALM
Following a fatal crash involving one of its autonomous vehicles in Arizona, Uber Technologies Inc. has told California regulators that the company will not renew its permit to test self-driving cars in the Golden State.
Uber's permit, which expires on March 31, covers 29 cars, according to the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Uber voluntarily suspended its testing programs around the country and in Canada after one of its cars operating in autonomous mode struck and killed a woman as she was crossing a Tempe, Arizona, road on the night of March 19.
In a letter sent Tuesday to an Uber executive, the DMV's chief counsel, Brian Soublet, said “Uber has indicated that it will not renew its current permit to test autonomous vehicles in California.”
If Uber chooses to restart its testing program, “Uber must apply for a new vehicle testing permit,” Soublet wrote in a letter first reported in the San Francisco Chronicle. “Any application for a new permit will need to address any follow-up analysis or investigations from the recent crash in Arizona and may also require a meeting with the department.”
An Uber spokesperson said in a statement: “We proactively suspended our self-driving operations, including in California, immediately following the Tempe incident. Given this, we decided to not reapply for a California DMV permit with the understanding that our self-driving vehicles would not operate on public roads in the immediate future.”
Uber has been under intense scrutiny following the fatal crash. The New York Times reported Friday that the self-driving program was not meeting intense company deadlines and expectations for operation targets even before the crash.
On Monday, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, who wooed Uber to his state in 2016 with promises of a much less-regulated environment than California, suspended the company from testing its autonomous vehicles in his state, calling the onboard video of the Tempe crash “disturbing and alarming.”
Uber was once one of the biggest testers of autonomous vehicles in California. Recent figures for testing licenses show that companies such as Apple Inc., Tesla Inc. and Waymo Inc. had more test cars on California's roads.
Uber's Tempe crash has raised novel legal questions about who could be held liable for a car driving in autonomous mode. The Glendale, Arizona, firm Bellah Perez has said its lawyers have been retained by the victim's daughter.
“By encouraging businesses like Uber to set up shop in Arizona, the state has hoped to be at the forefront of emerging technology and the sharing economy,” the firm said in a statement on its website. “But the potentially drastic shift in accident liability associated with self-driving technology is causing many professionals to question the legal implications of the industry.”
The firm has not announced any legal action.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLegal Tech Startups That Google-backed Venture Firms Invested in Throughout 2024
OpenAI Hires First Compliance Chief, Snagging Uber's Scott Schools
Faegre Drinker Picks Arizona for Next-Gen Design Lab
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250