Product Liability
Onewheel Litigation: MDL 3087 Status and Recall Record
Federal Onewheel claims are consolidated as MDL 3087. The record shows two CPSC recalls and a December 2025 settlement in principle, with no approval yet.
On this page
Something in this article wrong, out of date, or missing its source? Send the editorial desk a note.
The Onewheel litigation is a group of federal product liability cases about a self-balancing electric skateboard that riders say can stop balancing without warning. The cases are consolidated as MDL No. 3087 in the Northern District of California before Judge Beth Labson Freeman. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation counted 161 actions pending as of October 1, 2026, against 164 filed in total. In December 2025 the parties told the court the MDL had settled in principle, and the court vacated the first trial dates. No settlement amount, preliminary approval order or final approval order appears in the docket entries reviewed for this article.
What the Onewheel is and what the lawsuits allege
The Onewheel is a single-wheel electric skateboard with front and rear footpads. The rider stands astride the wheel and leans to move. Future Motion Inc., of Santa Cruz, California, makes the device.
The Panel’s transfer order, filed December 8, 2023, describes the common allegation. The complaints assert that the Onewheel “can unexpectedly stop or shut off, causing the front of the skateboard to ’nosedive’ into the ground and throw the rider off at speeds as high as 20 miles per hour” (transfer order). The order records 31 actions pending in 14 districts, plus eight related actions in five districts. Counting potential tag-alongs, it describes nearly forty related actions in seventeen districts.
The Panel chose the Northern District of California because Future Motion’s headquarters and manufacturing facility are there, and because related claims were pending in coordinated California state court proceedings. It assigned the litigation to Judge Freeman. The order did not exclude the Loh economic loss class action, already pending in that district, and said the transferee court would likely coordinate the injury and economic loss claims.
What CPSC has done
On August 11, 2022, the CPSC announced a recall of front footpads for the Onewheel GT, about 20,500 units. The agency said the footpad “can fail to disengage after the rider has dismounted while the board is in motion and the skateboard can unexpectedly continue to operate, posing an injury hazard to bystanders” (CPSC recall 22-766). It reported 813 reports of boards continuing to operate after the rider dismounted, including 11 reports of injuries such as bruises, friction burns and a twisted ankle. The remedy was a free replacement footpad.
On September 29, 2023, the CPSC and Future Motion announced a second recall covering all Onewheel models: the original Onewheel, Onewheel+, Onewheel+ XR, Onewheel Pint, Pint X and GT. The notice puts the number of units at 300,000 and states the hazard this way: “The skateboards can stop balancing the rider if the boards’ limits are exceeded, posing a crash hazard that can result in serious injury or death” (CPSC recall 23-299).
The 2023 notice reports dozens of incident reports, including four reported deaths between 2019 and 2021, and injuries including traumatic brain injury, concussion, paralysis, upper-body fractures, lower-body fractures and ligament damage. It states that the reported deaths resulted from head trauma and that in at least three of those incidents the rider was not wearing a helmet.
The remedy differed by model. Owners of the GT, Pint X, Pint and XR were told to update the board’s firmware through the Onewheel app to add a warning feature called Haptic Buzz, which buzzes and sounds when the board nears its limits or enters a low battery or error state. The notice said the GT update would be available within one week and the other updates within six weeks. Owners of the original Onewheel and the Onewheel+ were directed to arrange a pro-rated refund as a store credit after confirming disposal of the board.
A recall is a regulatory action. It is not a court finding that the device was defective or that it caused any particular injury.
What is established vs. what is alleged
Established by the documents reviewed: the CPSC announced the two recalls described above; the Panel centralized the federal claims as MDL No. 3087 before Judge Freeman; the court recorded on December 18, 2025 that “the MDL has settled in principle” and vacated the first trial dates (CMO No. 10); and the docket shows the appointments of Epiq as qualified settlement fund administrator on April 7, 2026 and Robert A. Black as settlement special master on May 7, 2026 (docket).
Alleged and not decided by any court in the documents reviewed: that the Onewheel has a design or manufacturing defect; that such a defect caused a specific rider’s injuries or death; and that Future Motion failed to provide adequate warnings.
A settlement in principle is an agreement between the parties. It is not a judicial finding on the merits.
Where the federal litigation stands
MDL No. 3087 is the federal consolidation. The Panel’s October 1, 2026 report lists 161 actions pending and 164 filed in total, so the docket has shrunk only slightly despite the December 2025 settlement announcement.
Case Management Order No. 10 identifies the first two representative personal injury cases as Oatridge, et al. v. Future Motion, Inc., No. 21-cv-09906, and McAllister v. Future Motion, Inc., No. 23-cv-06394, and vacated a trial date of June 15, 2026 for the first of them.
The later docket entries reviewed are consistent with a settlement being documented and administered. On June 29, 2026, a clerk’s notice stated that the court was working with the parties in the class-action part of the MDL to set a settlement conference and had vacated a reserved July 14 date because the defendant was unavailable. On October 1, 2026, the court held a further case management conference and set the next one for February 18, 2027.
No order granting preliminary or final approval of a settlement, and no settlement amount, appears in the entries reviewed. The most recent entries, from October 2026, do not include public text, so this article does not describe them.
Key dates
- August 11, 2022: CPSC announces the recall of about 20,500 Onewheel GT front footpads (CPSC recall 22-766).
- September 29, 2023: CPSC and Future Motion announce the recall of 300,000 Onewheel boards across all models, with a firmware warning remedy for newer models and a pro-rated store credit for the two oldest (CPSC recall 23-299).
- December 8, 2023: the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation files the transfer order creating MDL No. 3087 in the Northern District of California (transfer order).
- December 18, 2025: the court enters Case Management Order No. 10, recording that the MDL has settled in principle and vacating the first trial dates (CMO No. 10).
- April 7, 2026: the court appoints Epiq as qualified settlement fund administrator and lien administrator (docket).
- May 7, 2026: the court appoints Robert A. Black as settlement special master (docket).
- October 1, 2026: the Panel’s report counts 161 actions pending; the court holds a case management conference and sets the next one for February 18, 2027 (JPML report; docket).
What this does not establish
Nothing in the reviewed record establishes that the Onewheel is defective as a matter of law, that it caused any individual’s injury, or that Future Motion is liable to anyone. The CPSC recalls establish that a federal agency and the manufacturer took the actions described in the notices, not liability, and a recall remedy is not compensation for an injury.
The record reviewed also does not establish the terms of the settlement in principle. It does not state a settlement amount, a class definition, a claims process or a payment schedule, and it does not show that any court has approved a settlement. The December 2025 announcement is not a final resolution or a promise of payment.
This article also does not describe the California state court proceedings beyond the transfer order’s reference to them, because no state court document was reviewed.
Frequently asked questions
Is there a settlement in the Onewheel litigation?
Yes, in the limited sense that the parties told the court in December 2025 that the MDL had settled in principle, and the court recorded that statement in Case Management Order No. 10. The docket shows a settlement administrator and a settlement special master were appointed in 2026. No settlement amount or approval order appears in the entries reviewed.
Does the CPSC recall mean the Onewheel is defective?
No. A recall is a regulatory action. The CPSC’s 2023 notice states a crash hazard and describes the remedy, but it is not a court judgment that the product was defective or caused a particular injury. The record reviewed shows no such ruling.
Which Onewheel models were recalled?
The 2023 recall covers the original Onewheel, Onewheel+, Onewheel+ XR, Onewheel Pint, Onewheel Pint X and Onewheel GT. The 2022 recall covered front footpads for the Onewheel GT only.
Is the Onewheel litigation the same as the CPSC action?
No. The CPSC action is an agency recall process. The litigation is a federal multidistrict proceeding in which private plaintiffs assert personal injury, wrongful death and economic loss claims. The two are separate, although they concern the same product. The court set the next case management conference for February 18, 2027, and the docket is the place to check current status.
Sources
- United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation: “MDL Statistics Report - Distribution of Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending” (link, accessed 2026-10-20)
- United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation: “Transfer Order, In re Future Motion, Inc. Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3087” (link, accessed 2026-10-20)
- U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission: “Future Motion Recalls Onewheel Self-Balancing Electric Skateboards Due to Crash Hazard; Four Deaths Reported” (link, accessed 2026-10-20)
- U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission: “Future Motion Recalls Footpads for Onewheel GT Electric Skateboards Due to Bystander Injury Hazard” (link, accessed 2026-10-20)
- United States District Court for the Northern District of California: “Case Management Order No. 10, In re Future Motion, Inc. Products Liability Litigation, No. 5:23-md-03087-BLF” (link, accessed 2026-10-20)
- United States District Court for the Northern District of California (CourtListener RECAP): “Docket, In re Future Motion, Inc. Products Liability Litigation, No. 5:23-md-03087-BLF” (link, accessed 2026-10-20)
CollectiveClaim.us publishes general legal information. This article is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Court records and agency actions change; verify current status with the court or agency before relying on it.