Google Wins Dismissal of Suit Alleging Gemini AI Assistant Secretly Tracked Users' Private Messages

A federal judge in California just threw out a proposed class-action lawsuit accusing Google of secretly monitoring users’ private emails, chats, and video calls through its Gemini AI assistant. The ruling comes after the plaintiffs failed to provide enough detail about what information was accessed or how they were harmed by the alleged tracking.

The suit, filed by Thomas Thele and Melo Porter in November, accused Google of violating state and federal wiretapping statutes and invading users’ privacy when it switched on Gemini as a default feature for all Gmail, Chat, and Meet users in October 2025. Before that, users had to actively opt-in before Google’s AI could interact with their accounts.

Google argued that the plaintiffs never adequately alleged that their own data was touched or described a concrete enough injury to satisfy the standing requirements under Article III of the Constitution. The company pointed out that the plaintiffs failed to explain when they first signed up for Google’s services, whether they were already using Gmail, Chat, or Meet before Gemini was enabled by default on October 10, 2025.

The judge agreed with Google’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint, concluding that it failed to describe with sufficient detail the central harm it was built around: Google’s supposed intrusion into users’ private communications. The opinion highlighted several specific gaps in the complaint, including a lack of explanation about why October 10, 2025, was significant.

The judge noted that the plaintiffs never explained whether they were shown Google’s privacy policies when creating their accounts or confirmed whether Gemini’s features were already active at account setup. There was also no statement on whether users had since turned off the AI assistant’s features. The opinion stated that nothing in the complaint ruled out the possibility that Gemini had been running as a default feature well before October 2025.

Judge Wise found that the plaintiffs failed to show their own personal data was actually affected by Gemini, despite broadly describing sensitive financial, medical, and employment information that can live inside a Google account. The complaint didn’t point to any specific messages or communications that Gemini supposedly analyzed nor identify any particular personal data used by the AI tool.

The judge rejected the plaintiffs’ bid to pursue an order blocking Google’s practices going forward, finding they hadn’t shown they or other members of the proposed class faced an ongoing or future risk of the same harm. The court noted that users can eliminate any risk by switching off Gemini’s ‘smart’ features in their account settings.

Despite dismissing the complaint, Judge Wise gave the plaintiffs 21 days to file a new version addressing the shortcomings. Citing the general principle that courts should freely allow amended pleadings when doing so serves the interests of justice and helps resolve cases on their merits rather than procedural technicalities, the judge allowed the plaintiffs another chance.

The underlying complaint accused Google of violating California’s constitutional privacy protections and the state’s Invasion of Privacy Act, which bars secretly recording or intercepting confidential communications without consent. It also alleged violations of California’s computer data access law and the federal Stored Communications Act, both of which prohibit intentionally accessing protected electronic information without authorization.

Google argued that users can opt-out of Gemini’s features by switching them off in their account settings. The company pointed out that this option is available to all users who want to avoid having their private communications monitored or analyzed by the AI assistant. Users have control over how they use the Gemini tool and whether it interacts with their accounts.

The ruling comes as a significant development in the ongoing debate about artificial intelligence assistants and data analysis tools used for businesses. Concerns are being raised about user privacy and consent as more companies integrate AI into their services.

The Supreme Court recently ruled that police conducted a Fourth Amendment search when they obtained a robbery suspect’s Google Location History data through a geofence warrant. This decision strengthens privacy protections for cell-phone location records while leaving key questions about the warrant itself unresolved.

Amazon is facing a class-action lawsuit over claims its Ring doorbell cameras used facial recognition technology to scan, identify, and store people’s faces without consent. Similar concerns are being raised about user privacy in this case.

A group of Black employees who accused Google of maintaining disparities in hiring, pay, and promotions has reached a settlement with the company. The lawsuit alleged that Google engaged in a ‘pattern and practice’ of discrimination against its minority workers.

This case highlights the need for companies to be transparent about their use of AI tools and data analysis techniques. Companies like Google must consider the potential consequences of using these technologies without proper safeguards in place.

A Florida father has filed a federal lawsuit against Google alleging that its Gemini AI assistant contributed to events leading up to his son’s suicide and an alleged attempt to stage a violent incident near Miami International Airport. The lawsuit raises concerns about the potential consequences of using AI assistants without proper safeguards in place.