Alphabet’s Google has secured a major legal victory after a federal judge in San Francisco rejected a consumer bid seeking more than $2 billion in penalties related to the company’s past data collection practices. On Friday, Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg denied the plaintiffs’ request to force Google to disgorge $2.36 billion in alleged profits and to impose restrictions on certain advertising-related data practices.
The ruling follows a September jury verdict that found Google liable for collecting app activity data from millions of users who had turned off a key privacy setting. While the jury sided with consumers on liability, it awarded approximately $425 million in damages—far below the $31 billion initially sought by the plaintiffs. The jury also issued an advisory verdict stating that disgorgement of profits was not warranted in the case.
Google had urged Judge Seeborg not to impose additional penalties beyond the jury’s verdict. In his decision, the judge agreed, stating that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate entitlement to disgorgement and that their estimates of Google’s profits were “insufficiently supported.” He also declined to issue a permanent injunction, ruling that consumers had not shown any prospective or irreparable harm that would justify blocking Google’s data collection practices.
The plaintiffs argued that Google continued its data collection without changing privacy disclosures, despite the verdict. Google countered that restricting its ability to collect account-related data would severely damage analytics services relied upon by millions of app developers. Judge Seeborg accepted Google’s position, noting the lack of evidence that ongoing practices posed immediate harm to users.
In a separate blow to Google’s defense, the judge rejected the company’s request to decertify the class action, which includes approximately 98 million users and 174 million devices. Google has denied any wrongdoing and announced plans to appeal the September verdict.
The case, Rodriguez v. Google LLC, remains closely watched as it highlights ongoing legal scrutiny over data privacy, user consent, and the limits of financial penalties against major technology companies in the United States.


Yaskawa Electric Shares Slide as Weak Profit Overshadows Strong AI Demand
Bain Capital Exits Kioxia After AI-Fueled Valuation Surge
Morgan Stanley Says China’s Reusable Rocket Progress Poses Long-Term Challenge to SpaceX
Muji Owner Ryohin Keikaku Stock Soars After Raising Full-Year Earnings Forecast
Texas Man Charged After Fatal Tesla Full Self-Driving Crash in Katy
OpenAI Executive Fidji Simo to Step Down Amid Health Challenges Ahead of IPO
Australia Flags Child Safety Gaps at Apple, Meta, Google Over Online Sexual Extortion
TSMC Q2 Revenue Surges 36% as AI Chip Demand Powers Growth Ahead of Earnings
SK Hynix Soars 13% in Nasdaq Debut After Record $26.5 Billion IPO
Nippon Paint Reportedly Offers Up to €7.5 Billion for Akzo Nobel Decorative Paints Business
Nvidia Tightens AI Chip Sales in Asia With Stricter Customer Approval Process
Australia Sues Amazon Over Prime Video Ads and Subscription Terms
SK Hynix Shares Drop After Strong Nasdaq Debut Despite $26 Billion ADR Listing
Trump Administration Hands Over Key Evidence in Minnesota Immigration Shooting Investigations
DOJ Seeks Dismissal of Gautam Adani Bribery Case, Citing Foreign Scope
Stellantis Q2 Vehicle Shipments Rise 10% as North America Drives Growth
In a rebuke to Trump, the Supreme Court rules that birthright citizenship is the law of the land 



