Roblox litigation documents: the evidence library

Find Out If Your Family Has a Case

Free, confidential review by Attorney Matthew T. Marin. Answered by you, the parent or guardian. Prefer to talk? Call (888) 348-2735.

This is a library of the actual court documents in the Roblox litigation — the federal master docket, the significant orders entered in it, and the state attorney general complaints filed against Roblox — each posted with a short plain-language summary of what it is and what it says. Court filings are public records, but most of them sit behind the federal courts’ paywalled PACER system or on county clerk portals that are difficult to search, so parents, reporters, and researchers who want to read a document for themselves often cannot find one. Everything on this page is hosted exactly as filed, in the redacted form the court accepted; nothing under seal is posted here, and no document identifying a child appears in this library or ever will. Statements described in these filings are allegations by the parties who made them. No court has found Roblox or any other platform liable in these cases, and there is no settlement of families’ individual claims. The federal litigation is in its early stages, and every family’s case depends on its own facts.

How to read what is in this library

Three different kinds of documents sit here, and they do different things. Complaints — whether filed by a family or by a state attorney general — are the accusing party’s own account of the case; they are allegations, not findings, and the defendant has not yet answered them or has denied them. Orders are the court speaking, and they carry weight, but most orders at this stage decide procedure rather than merits. Dockets are the running index of everything filed in a case, which is how you confirm that a document is real and current. When a document below is described, the summary states which of the three it is and what the court has and has not decided.

Documents are cited in the form a footnote would use, so that anyone quoting from this page can carry the citation with them. Each entry names the filing party, the document, the case, the docket number, the court, and the date.

The federal litigation: MDL 3166

In re: Roblox Corporation Child Sexual Exploitation and Assault Litigation — Master Docket, No. 3:25-md-03166 (N.D. Cal., opened Dec. 12, 2025)

This is the master docket for the consolidated federal litigation: the running record of every filing, order, and hearing in the coordinated proceeding before Chief Judge Richard Seeborg in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, with Magistrate Judge Ajay Krishnan handling discovery. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created MDL 3166 in December 2025 to centralize federal lawsuits alleging that child sexual exploitation was facilitated through Roblox and connected platforms, so that one judge could manage the pretrial work common to all of them. As of August 2026, approximately 177 cases are pending in MDL 3166 before Chief Judge Richard Seeborg in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The litigation is in active discovery, and no ruling has issued on the platforms’ threshold defenses, including Section 230. The docket is the authoritative place to confirm the current posture of any case in the MDL.

Plaintiffs’ Common Arbitration Bellwether Complaint — In re Roblox Corp. Child Sexual Exploitation & Assault Litig., No. 3:25-md-03166, Dkt. 395 (N.D. Cal. July 28, 2026)

This is the common pleading filed for the arbitration bellwether track — a single master complaint setting out the allegations shared across a group of test cases against Roblox and Discord, filed alongside the individual bellwether complaints at Dkts. 395–403. Bellwethers are representative cases chosen to be worked up first so that the court and the parties can test how the shared legal questions resolve; this set exists because the platforms contend that many users’ claims must go to private arbitration rather than to court, making arbitration a live threshold battle running in parallel with the Section 230 defense. The complaint alleges that the platforms’ design and moderation choices enabled adult users to contact and exploit minors — allegations the companies dispute, and which no court has adjudicated.

Orders on Preservation of Child Sexual Abuse Material and Related Evidence — In re Roblox Corp. Child Sexual Exploitation & Assault Litig., No. 3:25-md-03166, Dkts. 415–416 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2026)

These two orders, entered the same day, establish how the most sensitive category of evidence in this litigation is preserved and handled: Dkt. 415 governs plaintiff-side evidence and Dkt. 416 sets out the defendants’ preservation protocols. Orders of this kind exist because material that is unlawful to possess or distribute cannot be exchanged in ordinary civil discovery, so courts build a controlled process for identifying, securing, and inspecting it. For families, the practical significance is that the court has directed the platforms to preserve records rather than allowing routine deletion to run its course — including material that is no longer visible in a user’s own account.

The state attorney general complaints

State attorneys general have filed their own enforcement suits against Roblox. These are government actions seeking to change company conduct and to obtain civil penalties payable to the state; they do not seek compensation for any individual child, and no family is a party to them. They are collected here because they are detailed, public, and heavily sourced accounts of what state investigators say they found.

State of Texas Original Petition — State of Texas v. Roblox Corp., No. (Tex. Dist. Ct. Nov. 7, 2025)

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Roblox on November 7, 2025, alleging that the company misrepresented the safety of its platform to parents and failed to protect the children using it, in violation of Texas consumer-protection law. The petition sets out the state’s account of Roblox’s age-verification, chat, and moderation practices and asks for injunctive relief and civil penalties. Roblox disputes the state’s allegations; the case has proceeded past the pleading stage and remains in litigation, and no finding of liability has been entered.

State of Florida Complaint — Office of the Attorney General v. Roblox Corp., No. (Fla. Cir. Ct., Baker County, Dec. 11, 2025)

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier filed suit against Roblox in Baker County Circuit Court on December 11, 2025, bringing claims under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The complaint alleges that Roblox marketed itself to families as a safe environment for children while its design and enforcement practices left minors exposed to adult predators on the platform. These are the state’s allegations, which Roblox disputes, and the court has not ruled on them.

State of Iowa Petition — State of Iowa ex rel. Bird v. Roblox Corp., No. (Iowa Dist. Ct., Polk County, Dec. 16, 2025)

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird sued Roblox in Polk County District Court on December 16, 2025, alleging that the platform’s safety representations to parents were deceptive and that its design choices exposed Iowa children to sexual exploitation. The petition is among the more procedurally advanced of the state actions: it survived Roblox’s motion to dismiss in May 2026 and carries a trial date of November 8, 2027 — the first trial date set in any Roblox child-safety case in the country. Roblox denies the state’s allegations, and surviving a motion to dismiss is a ruling that a case may proceed, not a finding that anything alleged is true.

Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss — State of Iowa ex rel. Bird v. Roblox Corp., No. (Iowa Dist. Ct., Polk County, May 2026)

This order denied Roblox’s motion to dismiss the Iowa attorney general’s petition, allowing the state’s claims to move into discovery and toward the November 2027 trial date. A ruling on a motion to dismiss decides only whether the allegations, assumed true for the purpose of the motion, state a legal claim — the court made no finding about what actually happened, and Roblox continues to dispute the state’s allegations. It is nonetheless a significant order, because it is one of the first substantive rulings anywhere rejecting a platform’s threshold defenses in a Roblox child-safety case.

What this library is not

It is not a complete copy of the docket, and it is not legal advice. Documents are added as significant events occur, and a document posted here reflects the record at the date shown on it — dockets move, and orders are amended, appealed, and superseded. Anyone relying on a filing for a legal purpose should confirm its current status on the court’s own docket. Nothing here identifies a child: filings involving minors appear in this library only in the redacted form in which the court received them, and only where the child is designated by initials or as a Doe.

Frequently Asked Questions

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.