United Airlines passengers who paid extra for a window seat and were seated next to a solid wall may be covered by a proposed class action alleging United sold “window seats” that have no window. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. United Airlines has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational. It is not legal advice.
What the United Window Seat Lawsuit Is About
A proposed class action in federal court in San Francisco claims United Airlines sold seats as “window seats” that sit next to a bare wall. The case is Brenman v. United Airlines, Inc., No. 3:25-cv-06995, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, before U.S. District Judge James Donato.On July 6, 2026, Judge Donato denied United’s motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged that United agreed to provide a seat with a window to passengers who paid for one. The ruling lets the case continue; it does not find that United broke any promise. The case is now in discovery, and under the court’s scheduling order the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is due by December 23, 2026.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What the Passengers Allege
According to the amended complaint, United began charging seat selection fees in 2017 and charges more for preferred seats. The plaintiffs say some seats on United aircraft are positioned where air conditioning ducts or other components run through the side panel, leaving no window, yet United’s booking pages and app still describe them as “window” seats and boarding passes label them the same way.The complaint gives seat 11A on certain Boeing 737-900s as one example and says United’s app has charged between $44.99 and $159.99 for some of these seats. It estimates that United has sold more than a million windowless window seats during the class period, and contrasts United with American Airlines and Alaska Airlines, which it says flag windowless seats for customers during booking. These figures are the plaintiffs’ estimates and have not been tested.
What the Judge Decided
United asked the court to throw out the case on two grounds. First, it argued that the federal Airline Deregulation Act, which bars states from regulating airline prices, routes and services, preempts the claims. Judge Donato disagreed, noting that claims based on an airline’s own contractual promises are not preempted.Second, United argued that its boarding passes and reservation screens are not part of its contract, and that “window seat” refers to a seat’s position relative to the aisle rather than an actual window. The judge pointed out that United’s Contract of Carriage incorporates terms printed on any ticket. “These terms plausibly establish that United expressly agreed to provide a seat with a window to passengers who paid for one,” he wrote, adding that “no more is needed at this stage for the breach claims to go forward.” He treated United’s definition of “window seat” as a factual dispute for a later stage.
United has since filed an answer denying the plaintiffs’ allegations. In a statement reported by ABC News, United did not comment on the litigation but said it added more detail to its seat selection process in 2025.
The Proposed Class
The amended complaint seeks to represent a nationwide class of all persons and entities in the United States who bought airfare from United, paid additional money to obtain a window seat, and received a seat without a window. It also proposes a California subclass. The suit seeks compensatory damages and other relief and was filed under the Class Action Fairness Act, alleging more than $5 million in controversy. A judge has not certified any class.A Similar Lawsuit Against Delta
The same plaintiffs’ firm filed a parallel case against Delta Air Lines on the same day in August 2025. That case, now captioned Bernardo v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-04608, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York before Judge Ramon E. Reyes Jr. Delta’s motion to dismiss was fully briefed in January 2026, and the plaintiffs pointed the court to the United ruling in July. The motion had not been decided in the most recent public filings reviewed, and the parties have been exchanging discovery in the meantime.What Happens Next
Under the scheduling order entered in November 2025, expert discovery in the United case closes November 25, 2026, the class certification motion is due December 23, 2026, and briefing on it runs into February 2027. Those dates can change by court order. If a class is certified, class members would generally receive notice explaining the case and their options. If the case later settles, a claim process would be announced at that time.Is There Anything to Claim?
No. There is no settlement, no fund and no claim form in either the United or the Delta case. OpenClassActions.com will update this page if the court certifies a class, rules on summary judgment, or the parties reach a settlement.Questions
Is there a United window seat settlement?
No. As of October 18, 2026 there is no settlement, no settlement fund and no claim form. The court denied United’s motion to dismiss in July 2026, the case is in discovery, and no class has been certified.
What did the judge decide?
On July 6, 2026, U.S. District Judge James Donato denied United’s motion to dismiss. He rejected United’s argument that the federal Airline Deregulation Act preempts the claims, and found the breach of contract, breach of implied contract and promissory estoppel claims plausibly alleged. The ruling does not decide whether United actually breached any contract.
What is United’s position?
United argued that “window seat” describes a seat’s position next to the cabin wall, not a promise of an actual window, and it denies the plaintiffs’ allegations in its answer. The judge said United’s definition raises a factual question that could not be resolved at the dismissal stage.
Who would be in the proposed class?
The amended complaint proposes a nationwide class of people and entities in the United States who bought airfare from United, paid extra to get a window seat, and were assigned a seat without a window, plus a California subclass. A court has not certified either group.
Is Delta facing a similar lawsuit?
Yes. Bernardo v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-04608, filed in the Eastern District of New York in August 2025, makes similar allegations about Delta. Delta’s motion to dismiss was fully briefed in January 2026 and had not been decided in the most recent public filings reviewed.
Sources
- Brenman v. United Airlines, Inc. — docket, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (CourtListener)
- Order re Motion to Dismiss, July 6, 2026 (CourtListener)
- First Amended Class Action Complaint, October 15, 2025 (CourtListener)
- Bernardo v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. — docket, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (CourtListener)
- Judge allows suit over airline window seats without a window to proceed (ABC News)
