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.


Chinese Universities with PLA Ties Found Purchasing Restricted U.S. AI Chips Through Super Micro Servers
SpaceX IPO Filing Expected This Week as Valuation Could Surpass $75 Billion
Reflection AI Eyes $25 Billion Valuation in Massive $2.5 Billion Funding Round
NASA Artemis II: First Crewed Moon Mission Since Apollo Takes Four Astronauts on 10-Day Lunar Journey
Norma Group Posts Revenue Decline in 2025, Eyes Modest Recovery in 2026
U.S. Appeals Court Strikes Down FTC Order Against TurboTax "Free" Advertising
TSMC Japan's Second Fab to Produce 3nm Chips by 2028
SpaceX Eyes Historic IPO at $1.75 Trillion Valuation
KPMG UK Cuts 440 Audit Jobs Amid Low Attrition and Cooling Professional Services Demand
Golden Dome Missile Defense: Anduril and Palantir Join Forces on Trump's $185B Space Shield
SMIC Allegedly Supplies Chipmaking Tools to Iran's Military, U.S. Officials Warn
Rubio Directs U.S. Diplomats to Use X and Military Psyops to Counter Foreign Propaganda
Meta and Google just lost a landmark social media addiction case. A tech law expert explains the fallout
OpenAI Pulls the Plug on Sora, Ending $1 Billion Disney Partnership
NASA's Artemis II Crew Arrives in Florida for Historic Moon Mission
Microsoft's $10 Billion Japan Investment: AI Infrastructure and Data Sovereignty Push
Microsoft Eyes $7B Texas Energy Deal to Power AI Data Centers 



