FCA US Emissions Warranty Settlement: Oct 28 Hearing, Pentastar Filing
- Final approval hearing
- Oct 28, 2026
By Settlement Insight Data Desk · Reviewed by Leonard GoldbergPublished
FCA US Emissions Warranty Settlement: Every Brief Is In for the October 28 Final Approval Hearing — and an October 8 Stipulation Addresses Claims in the Separate 3.6L Pentastar Engine Case. No Reimbursement Before Approval and Appeals.
Does this affect you?
AI Legal Assistant · free · answers in seconds · general information, not legal advice
What is the latest update on the Chrysler class action lawsuit?
As of October 21, 2026, every filing the court asked for before the final approval hearing is on the docket, and the hearing is still set for October 28, 2026, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 5C, 350 W. 1st Street, Los Angeles. This is the FCA US emissions warranty settlement in Regueiro v. FCA US LLC — the case over valve parts on 3.6L Ram, Jeep, Dodge and Chrysler models. Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett’s preliminary approval order of June 29, 2026 set the schedule: the motions for final approval and for attorneys’ fees “at least twenty-eight (28) days before the Final Approval Hearing,” replies “at least fourteen (14) days before,” and a declaration from FCA’s lawyers on the notice sent to state and federal officials under the Class Action Fairness Act, also 14 days before.
All of that was filed on schedule. The court’s electronic docket shows the settlement approval motion and the fee motion entered on September 30, 2026. FCA US filed responses supporting both motions on October 13. The plaintiff filed a reply on October 14, with a declaration of class counsel and two exhibits. And on October 15, FCA’s counsel filed a declaration “re Order on Motion for Settlement, 80” — the preliminary approval order. One more entry was new to us: an October 8 “Notice of Stipulation by Settling Parties Regarding Claims in Maugain, et al., v. FCA US LLC.” PacerMonitor’s copy of the docket, last updated October 19, 2026, shows nothing after October 15: no order moving the hearing and no ruling. We could not read the filings themselves, so we do not know how many claims, opt-outs or objections Kroll counted.
The October 8 filing and the 3.6L Pentastar engine case
Maugain v. FCA US LLC, No. 1:22-cv-00116 in the District of Delaware, is the case people search for as the “3.6 Pentastar class action lawsuit.” It is a separate consumer class action, filed January 28, 2022, over “2014 or newer Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, or RAM-branded vehicles equipped with 3.6L Pentastar V6 engine.” The plaintiffs allege defects in “the rocker arms, camshafts, lifters and related components,” and they say the defects cause “lifter collapse, rocker arm roller failure, and/or camshaft lobe destruction” and an “audible ticking noise.” These are allegations, not findings. On February 7, 2023, Judge Gregory B. Williams let some counts go forward and dismissed others. The complaint ran to 906 paragraphs over 192 pages and thirty-three counts. Our court-feed database shows new Maugain filings on October 12 and October 14, 2026, so the case is still active.
The overlap is why the October 8 filing matters. The Regueiro release covers claims “based on malfunction of the Valve Rocker Arm, Valve Stem Oil Seal, or Valve Tappet components in the Class Vehicles as pleaded in any complaint in the Action.” Those are the same kinds of parts that Maugain names. In June the court wrote that it was “unaware of any other ongoing litigation concerning this controversy.” Three months later, the settling parties put a stipulation about Maugain claims on the record before the hearing. The filing’s title is public. Its text is not posted anywhere we could reach, so we cannot say whether it preserves Maugain claims for owners in the Regueiro class, narrows them, or does something else. If you are part of the Maugain case, the October 28 hearing is where this will come up.
How much should I expect from a class action settlement like this one?
This one has no fund to split. The court noted that “the Settlement Agreement is not a common fund agreement.” FCA US pays each approved claim directly: reimbursement for money you “previously paid for diagnosis and/or repair relating to a failed Valve Rocker Arm, Valve Stem Oil Seal, or Valve Tappet component” that the settlement’s warranty would have covered. So the most you can get is what you actually paid and can prove. The court record gives two reference points. Class counsel’s declaration says that replacing a valve train part costs “approximately $600 to $1150.” The named plaintiff paid a $210 diagnostic fee and later another $100, or $310 in total. Attorneys’ fees and costs of up to $1,005,000 and a $7,500 service award are paid by FCA US on top. Under the court’s summary, they “will not reduce or otherwise affect the benefits to the Class Members.”
The timeline is set by the settlement agreement. Kroll has 60 days after receiving a claim to tell the claimant what FCA US will pay and why any amount was cut. A claimant then has 20 days to cure a deficiency, and Kroll has 35 days to make a final determination. If you do not try to cure, the offer counts as accepted. Checks go out “within 21 days of FCA US funding the Settlement Fund” and are “valid for 90 days.” None of that money moves early: “No reimbursements under the Settlement will be issued until after the Court gives its final approval to the Settlement and after any appeals are resolved.” The notice warns that an appeal is possible even after approval and that “we don’t know how long that process may take.” The forward-looking benefit is a warranty on the three parts. It runs for “the earlier of 7 years from the Class Vehicle’s in-service date or 70,000 miles driven,” it needs no claim, and it “survives the sale of the vehicle.” Like the reimbursements, it depends on final approval.
What to do now: the deadlines have passed
The claim deadline was October 12, 2026 (online by 11:59 p.m. PT or postmarked that day). The opt-out and objection deadlines were the same date. If you filed a claim, you do not need to do anything until Kroll’s decision letter arrives. Read that letter as soon as it comes, because the 20-day cure window runs from the day you receive it. If you did not file, the notice says what happens: you still get the warranty extension if the settlement is approved, “but you won’t be reimbursed for a past … diagnosis and/or repair,” and “you will be bound by the Settlement.” Some claims are not released: claims for death, personal injury, damage to property other than the vehicle, subrogation, and pending lemon law claims. You may attend the October 28 hearing at your own expense, but you don’t have to.
Is the email or letter real?
The only contact points in the court-approved notice are the website FCAwarrantysettlement.com, the toll-free number (833) 930-0207, and the mailing address Regueiro v. FCA US LLC, c/o Kroll Settlement Administration, P.O. Box 225391, New York, NY 10150-5391. Claims could be sent by mail, by email, or through that website. A real decision letter will state an amount, a reason for any reduction, and your right to cure. It comes from Kroll, not from FCA US or a dealer. Before you send documents in reply, check that the sender’s address and phone number match the ones above. The notice says “please do not contact the court or FCA US’s counsel” with questions about the settlement. One practical note: in our tests, the official site blocked automated requests, so if it does not load, call the number instead.
Stellantis, the federal emissions warranty, and what this case is not
Is Stellantis affiliated with FCA US LLC? Yes. In the subsidiary list Stellantis filed with the SEC for 2021, FCA US LLC is a principal subsidiary held 100 percent by Stellantis N.V. The defendant in this case is FCA US LLC.
What is covered under the federal emissions warranty? According to the EPA fact sheet, the federal Performance Warranty covers repairs needed “during the first 2 years or 24,000 miles” after a vehicle fails an emission test. “Specified major emission control components are covered for the first 8 years or 80,000 miles.” This settlement does not change that federal coverage. It is about California’s stricter rules: the plaintiff alleged that the California Emissions Warranty “provides for a 7 year or 70,000-mile warranty for high-priced, emissions-related parts,” and that FCA US should have treated the valve parts that way. That is why the class covers only vehicles bought in California and the 10 “Reg. 177” states that adopted California’s rules: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. An owner elsewhere is not in this class. For a valve-train or engine failure in another state, the Maugain case in Delaware or an individual warranty or lemon-law claim is the more likely route, and that is a question for your own lawyer.

