On a warm April evening in downtown Charleston, what should have been a routine Uber ride turned into a harrowing ordeal for Bryan Kobel, the CEO of the biotechnology firm TC BioPharm. The incident, which unfolded outside a bustling restaurant on Upper King Street, has now sparked a high-profile lawsuit against Uber and its driver, thrusting questions of rider safety, disability rights, and corporate accountability into the local and national spotlight.
According to The Post and Courier, Kobel and his girlfriend had just finished dinner at Maison, a French restaurant, on April 24, 2025. Accompanied by his small, brown goldendoodle—a licensed service dog—Kobel summoned an Uber via the company’s app. What happened next was captured in a chilling 15-second surveillance video: as the couple waited in a nearby parking lot, a grey Audi SUV arrived. The driver, later identified as Vadim Nikolaevich Uliumdzhiev, confronted Kobel and his girlfriend, sparking a heated argument over Kobel’s attempt to bring his service animal along for the ride.
Witnesses and police reports agree on the next moments. Uliumdzhiev, visibly agitated, exited his vehicle and approached Kobel, who maintained that his dog was a registered service animal protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Uliumdzhiev, for his part, told police after his arrest that he was allergic to dogs. The confrontation escalated rapidly: surveillance footage shows Uliumdzhiev slamming his forehead into Kobel’s nose, then landing a closed-fist punch to his jaw. Kobel collapsed, hitting his head on the pavement and losing consciousness, his dog tumbling from his arms and wandering around as bystanders rushed to help.
Kobel was left sprawled on the ground in a pool of blood, suffering from a concussion and what his attorney described as a traumatic brain injury. Emergency services were called, and bystanders managed to snap a photo of the fleeing driver’s license plate as Uliumdzhiev sped away. The entire altercation, as documented in the police incident report and confirmed by video evidence, lasted no more than 15 seconds.
In the days and weeks that followed, the aftermath proved nearly as distressing as the attack itself. Kobel’s Uber account was reportedly deactivated when he tried to follow up on formal complaints, according to his attorney, Kenneth Berger. The driver, Uliumdzhiev, 42, was arrested on May 8 and charged with second-degree assault and battery. Investigators discovered that Uliumdzhiev was a Russian national in the United States without legal residency, and that the driver’s license he had provided to Uber was a fake. After posting a $10,000 bond, Uliumdzhiev was transferred to a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) processing center in Folkston, Georgia, where he remains as of August 20, with the criminal case against him pending in Charleston County Circuit Court. He is scheduled for a second court appearance in mid-October 2025.
On August 18, Kobel filed a lawsuit against Uber, its subsidiary Raiser, and Uliumdzhiev, alleging gross negligence in driver screening and document verification. The suit contends that Uber failed to properly vet Uliumdzhiev, allowing him to operate with fraudulent credentials. According to the complaint, this alleged lapse in oversight directly led to the violent altercation that left Kobel seriously injured.
Attorney Kenneth Berger emphasized the broader implications of the case. “Success in this case will be measured by Uber’s response,” he told The Post and Courier, noting that Kobel is far from the only person to report being violently victimized by an Uber driver, both in South Carolina and across the country. Berger hopes the lawsuit will force Uber to take greater responsibility for the safety of its riders and improve its driver screening processes. “This is an incident no one ever wanted to happen,” he said.
The case is not an isolated one. Uber, a California-based rideshare giant that operates an estimated 33 million trips per day, faces nearly a dozen pending lawsuits in Charleston County alone for a variety of alleged transgressions. The company’s official website states that it partners with three different third-party agencies to conduct background checks on potential drivers, and that applicants must provide valid identification and pass rigorous checks before being allowed to drive.
When contacted by The Post and Courier, an Uber spokesperson responded by email: “There is no place for violence on the Uber platform. While we can’t comment on pending litigation, Uber is deeply committed to safety and complies with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations around worker eligibility.” The company did not directly answer questions about whether either Kobel’s or Uliumdzhiev’s Uber accounts had been suspended following the incident.
At the heart of the altercation was a dispute over Kobel’s right to bring his service dog into the Uber vehicle. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires businesses and service providers, including rideshare companies, to accommodate service animals. Documentation provided by Berger to The Post and Courier confirmed that Kobel’s goldendoodle is a properly licensed service animal, fully qualifying for public access. Denying entry to Kobel and his dog, the lawsuit argues, was a violation of his federally protected rights.
As the legal battle unfolds, the case has reignited debate over the responsibilities of rideshare companies in ensuring passenger safety and upholding civil rights. Advocates for people with disabilities have pointed to the incident as a stark reminder of the challenges many face when relying on gig economy services. Meanwhile, critics of Uber’s business model argue that the company’s rapid expansion and reliance on third-party background checks have created gaps in oversight—gaps that, in this case, allegedly allowed a driver with fraudulent documents to slip through the cracks.
For Kobel, the road to recovery has been long and difficult. The traumatic brain injury he suffered in the attack has required extensive treatment, and the emotional toll has been significant. Yet both he and his attorney remain determined to see the case through, hoping that their efforts will lead to meaningful changes in Uber’s practices and greater protection for riders everywhere.
With the criminal case against Uliumdzhiev still pending and the civil lawsuit moving forward, Charleston—and the nation—will be watching closely. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for the rideshare industry, disability rights, and the future of passenger safety in the era of app-based transportation.
