News
Tesla FSD’s prolonged release doesn’t make it a ‘fraud,’ company says
Tesla Full Self-Driving’s prolonged release doesn’t make it a “fraud,” the company said in a motion to dismiss a case.
Tesla is currently involved in a class-action lawsuit from a few Autopilot and Full Self-Driving customers and has recently filed a motion to dismiss the case with the U.S. District Court in San Francisco. In that motion, a statement was made by Tesla’s attorneys that may have been taken out of context by some media reports.
Teslarati obtained a copy of the motion, and here is what we found.
After some background information on FSD, Tesla noted that each of the plaintiffs purchased a vehicle, and “all but one allegedly purchase the FSDC package.” (FSDC is an acronym for full self-driving capability.)
“Plaintiffs knew at the time of purchase that their cars were not completely autonomous. And they knew that the timeline towards more complete autonomy was contingent upon numerous factors, including software development and regulatory approval. Yet now they sue Tesla, complaining that their cars are not completely autonomous.”
The document noted that four out of five of the named plaintiffs have valid arbitration agreements with Tesla that should be enforced and cover all of their claims. The one plaintiff who opted out “advanced a consolidated complaint riddled with defects, and that should be dismissed.”
The plaintiff “sued too late–five years after he purchased his vehicle and the optional software package, well after any of his claims accrued. All of his claims are time-barred and should be dismissed. Moreover, the hundreds-of-paragraph, narrative complaint fails to support a single cognizable legal theory. The Complaint makes no mention of the parties’ written contract or Tesla’s car warranty. It instead cherry-picks numerous statements allegedly made by Tesla and attempts to manufacture claims for fraud and breach of warranty.”
Tesla’s attorneys made several statements, including that headline-worthy one regarding FSD and failure. However, the attorneys never claimed that FSD is a failure. In the document, the attorneys pointed out that the complaint “identifies no statement that Tesla made that was fraudulent.”
Additionally, it added that no there was no statement made that Tesla’s vehicles, including those equipped with the FSDC package, were fully autonomous at the time of the Plaintiff’s purchase. Tesla’s website also made it very clear that those vehicles were not.
Tesla’s attorneys noted that the plaintiff allegedly researched Tesla’s online and public statements and reviewed them before buying his vehicles. The labels of “Autopilot,” “Enhanced Autopilot,” or “Full Self-Driving Capability” didn’t mean that the vehicles were fully autonomous. Tesla’s attorneys also noted that Tesla’s user manuals plainly showed this as well.
“Nor would any reasonable consumer purchase a Tesla vehicle with the belief that it is fully autonomous based solely on these labels,” the attorneys said.
Instead, each of the plaintiffs alleged that they “decided to purchase [his or her] vehicle and the ADAS packages after researching, reviewing, and relying on Tesla’s online and other public statements.”
The plaintiff’s “assertion that Tesla promised the vehicles were already fully autonomous when they were sold rings hollow,” the attorneys stated.
“His assertion that Tesla promised to release completely autonomous capabilities ‘within a reasonable time after,’ his purchase fares no better.”
“No allegations show that Tesla promised that the FSDC package would enable full autonomy within a specified period of time. Many of the statements quoted in the Complaint did not even concern the FSDC package,” the attorneys said, adding that this makes it irrelevant to the plaintiff’s claims.
“In addition, the quoted statements were also often accompanied by and subject to the qualifier that a release of fully autonomous capabilities to the general public would require government approval, a variable over which Tesla had no control, and that any regulatory clearance would require a vast amount of data to show that completely autonomous driving is significantly safer than human driving.”
The attorneys cited another federal court that said similar statements “do not constitute fraud” because they indicate that Tesla wasn’t making the absolute representation the Plaintiff said he was.
“Same here. Especially under the heightened Rule 9(b) standard, no allegation suggests that the aspirational statements that Tesla did make were, somehow, false when made. See Richardson, 2000 WL.”
“To the contrary, allegations in the Complaint demonstrate that Tesla has been constantly improving its ADAS technology by releasing software updates, with a goal of achieving more and better autonomy capabilities in the future.”
“Mere failure to realize a long-term, aspirational goal is not fraud.“
In reference to the above statement, the attorneys pointed out that the courts often rejected the argument that a plaintiff can prove the fraudulent intent by pointing to Tesla’s “subsequent failure to perform under the agreement.”
Since launching the software in 2015, Tesla has made a lot of progress toward FSD and autonomous. Tesla has had two AI Day events explaining the technology being developed and used. And Tesla has since launched an FSD Beta testing program, and you can read the recent Tesla FSD Beta news here.
Disclosure: Johnna is a $TSLA shareholder and believes in Tesla’s mission.
Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.
Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
News
Tesla Robotaxi riders will face the best dilemma when booking a ride
Tesla has updated its Robotaxi app so riders can pick which vehicle they want before they book. The latest in-app screens now show two options side by side: the two-seat Cybercab and the four-seat Model Y.
A screenshot circulating Thursday shows the change in practice. In Austin, a rider could choose a gold Cybercab for two people or a Model Y for four. Tesla’s updated description calls Cybercab “our first purpose-built autonomous vehicle,” designed for safety, accessibility, and comfort, and says the lineup is available only through the Robotaxi app.
Tesla has updated their Robotaxi page in the App Store. You’ll be able to select if you want a Cybercab or Model Y Robotaxi.
“Our Robotaxi vehicle lineup now includes Cybercab, our first purpose-built autonomous vehicle. Designed for safety, accessibility and comfort, Cybercab… pic.twitter.com/Jff4klilDr
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 3, 2026
The distinction is more than cosmetic, and it’s important to note that Robotaxi refers to the platform, while Cybercab refers to a vehicle.
Model Y Robotaxis have carried the service since it opened in Austin in mid-2025 and later expanded to Dallas, Houston, and parts of Florida. Those vehicles are converted production SUVs that still have steering wheels and pedals.
Cybercab is different. It has no driver controls, butterfly doors, a low seat height meant to work with wheelchairs, extra trunk space for assistive devices, and braille on the handles. Tesla has registered dozens of the two-seaters with Texas regulators in the days leading up to its September 3 Austin event.
Giving riders a choice lets Tesla match the vehicle to the trip. Most rides involve one or two people, which is where Cybercab is meant to be cheaper and more efficient to operate. Groups of three or four, or anyone who needs more space, can still request a Model Y.
The same app handles booking, payment, cabin settings, and, on Cybercab, features such as phone-based door opening and in-cabin voice controls.
The update does not mean every city suddenly has both cars available. Cybercab support is listed for Austin first, and the purpose-built fleet is still small compared with the existing Model Y roster. Even so, the app change marks a shift from a single-vehicle pilot to a mixed fleet.
Riders can now choose between the compact, purpose-built robotaxi and the familiar SUV that launched the service.
News
Tesla Cybercab sightings broaden well outside of Austin with autonomy in focus
Tesla Cybercab sightings are broadening far and wide, well outside of downtown Austin, Texas, with autonomy in focus as the company plans to launch the all-electric, two-seater this evening in the Lone Star State.
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab to a small group of people this evening in a dedicated event in Austin, Texas. Public details on the event are relatively slim.
However, Tesla’s focus on Cybercab falls well outside of the downtown Austin area and is expanding well across the United States as things continue to move quickly with the company’s autonomous efforts in 2026. Today, various images of Cybercab fleets in interesting locations have started to circulate.
The most notable is a fleet of at least 20 Cybercabs at Miami International Airport in Florida. Spotted last night, the fleet is expansive and is indicative of a looming release of Cybercabs once regulatory boxes are checked off.
Tesla has already been operating the Robotaxi platform in Miami for several months, but this Cybercab fleet at the airport could be joining the ride-hailing platform as approvals arrive:
20+ Cybercabs spotted near Miami international airport. pic.twitter.com/ORLsw8yFhf
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 3, 2026
Another fleet of Cybercabs was spotted at the Devon, PA showroom just outside of Philadelphia. We have seen several Cybercab units testing around the Philadelphia Metro Area, which is interesting considering Tesla does not have any active Robotaxi geofence in Pennsylvania.
Cybercab at the Devon location in PA has multiplied over the weekend. Seeing a few more test vehicles in the lot 👀 pic.twitter.com/DhJT4P1EkU
— Billy (@billykyle) August 22, 2026
Philadelphia would be an ideal location to test ride-hailing due to its dense tourist population, large, sprawling city layout, and to compete with other ride-hailing companies that operate in the city.
Expansive fleets of Cybercabs will be popping up in and around major cities throughout the rest of the year, if we were betting on it. Tesla has made it obvious that the Cybercab rollout will be aggressive and fast-paced, but within reason. Tesla is still prioritizing safety, so these testing phases will likely go on for some period of time before more members of the public are able to snag a Cybercab for a personal chariot.
News
Tesla Model Y L gets suspension complaints in over odd issue China
The Tesla Model Y L is arguably the most hyped trim of the all-electric crossover, other than the Performance configuration that comes with white-knuckle speed and sports car-level handling.
However, it is not all perfect. Tesla owners in China who took delivery of the Model Y L, denoted with an L to highlight its longer wheelbase, are experiencing what they are referring to as “collapsing” of the rear wheels, as suspension issues appear to be an issue with some of the builds.
🚨 Model Y L owners in China report rear suspension sag
• Six-seat long-wheelbase Y. Shanghai. On sale since August 2025
• Owners say the rear tire-to-arch gap shrinks after mileage or a full load. Some cases after about 9,000 km loaded. Others near 30,000 km
• Tesla service… pic.twitter.com/Lr6i5Tbi07— Joe Hansen (@joehansen) September 1, 2026
The gap between the wheel arch and tire has narrowed to the point that “not even a single finger” could fit, according to a report from Car News China. The failures are not tied to a specific mileage, as one owner said that after just 9,000 kilometers (5,600 miles), they noticed the suspension issue when their car was fully loaded.
Another one had the issue at 30,000 kilometers (18,640 miles) and noticed that the wheel gap shrank to two fingers, so not as drastic as the person who reported a similar issue at 9,000 km.
Tesla Model Y L is gaining momentum in China’s premium segment
Along with the visual recognition of the issue, others are saying the sagging is causing abnormal wear on the inside of the tires. Extra weight and instant torque already provide additional stress on the tires in electric vehicles during normal operation, so it is no surprise that this is another complaint.
There has been no recall issued by Tesla, and the company has not yet publicly acknowledged the issue.
Some are suggesting that owners use a “finger test” to self-diagnose whether there is an issue with the suspension. There should be four fingers between the tire and the wheel well; anything less than that starts to get dicey.