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.


The Realist’s Case: Lukas Kerrebijn of RD Dubai on the Narrative Dubai’s Agents Won’t Question
Nvidia Reportedly Eyes $13 Billion Hugging Face Acquisition
PayPal Shares Sink as $50 Billion Takeover Bid Collapses
U.S. Unseals Charges Against Five Alleged CJNG Leaders, Raises Reward for New Cartel Chief
Adidas, Puma Shares Fall as Dick’s Sporting Goods Cuts Outlook
Toyota Global Sales Fall as China Demand Slumps
Nvidia Pauses AI Cloud Financing Deals Amid Antitrust Concerns
SoftBank Eyes $20 Billion Bond Sale to Refinance OpenAI Loan
Meta Ordered to Pay $567M Over Child Safety Violations in New Mexico
U.S. Disrupts China-Linked Hacking Campaign Targeting Government Agencies
Nvidia Revenue Soars 106% as AI Demand Hits ‘Inflection Point’
Yindjibarndi Appeals Fortescue Mining Compensation Ruling
Salesforce Shares Surge as AI Demand Powers Q2 Earnings Beat
Google Changes EU Spam Policy Amid Antitrust Scrutiny
SK Biopharmaceuticals Secures Global Rights to Biohaven Epilepsy Drug Opakalim 



