Published
June 20, 2026
Updated
October 3, 2026
Thele v. Google, a proposed class action over Gemini “smart features” in Gmail, Chat and Meet, is back after a July 2026 dismissal: the plaintiffs refiled in August with new claims, and Google moved on September 29, 2026 to dismiss again. There is no settlement and nothing to claim.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Google LLC has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and there is nothing to claim at this time. Google disputes the claims. This page is general information, not legal advice.
Status
Refiled · New Motion to Dismiss Pending
First complaint dismissed July 7, 2026 · second amended complaint filed August 18 · Google moved to dismiss again September 29
Case
Thele v. Google LLC
No. 5:25-cv-09704 · N.D. Cal. (San Jose)
Can I Claim?
No — nothing to claim yet
no certified class, no settlement, no claim form
What Is the Google Gemini Gmail Lawsuit About?
Google is facing a proposed privacy class action alleging that it quietly turned on its Gemini artificial-intelligence assistant across Gmail, Google Chat, and Google Meet, letting the AI access users' private communications without asking permission. The case is Thele v. Google LLC, No. 5:25-cv-09704, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.According to the complaint, Google previously offered Gemini's "smart features" as an opt-in tool, but on or around October 10, 2025, allegedly switched the setting on by default for Gmail, Chat, and Meet accounts. Plaintiffs allege that this let Gemini track and analyze the contents of users' emails, attachments, chats, and meetings — and that the only way to stop it was to find and turn off a privacy setting most users never knew had changed. These are allegations the court has not ruled on, and Google disputes them.
What Are Gemini "Smart Features"?
Gemini is Google's generative-AI assistant, built into Google's apps to draft replies, summarize long email threads, search your inbox in plain language, and recap meetings. To do those things, the assistant needs access to the content it is working with. In Google's products, that access is governed by "smart features and personalization" settings.The lawsuit's core grievance is not that the feature exists, but how it was allegedly switched on. The complaint claims Google moved millions of accounts from opt-in to on-by-default without clear notice or consent, then described its privacy controls in a way the plaintiffs call misleading. Google's position, in general terms, is that smart features are long-standing, optional, and controlled by the user — a characterization at the heart of what the case will test.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What Does the Complaint Allege?
The plaintiffs bring the case on behalf of a proposed nationwide class. The complaint alleges that by enabling Gemini to read private messages without all-party consent, Google engaged in conduct the plaintiffs compare to secret wiretapping and eavesdropping. The filing asserts claims under, among other laws:• The California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) — the state's anti-wiretapping and eavesdropping statute (Cal. Penal Code §§ 631 and 632), which generally bars intercepting or recording confidential communications without consent
• The California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (CDAFA) (Penal Code § 502)
• The California constitutional right to privacy
• Common-law intrusion upon seclusion
• The federal Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.)
• California’s Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200), added in the August 2026 second amended complaint
In plain terms, plaintiffs say that when Gemini accessed the text of messages people reasonably expected to be private, every user who did not knowingly agree may have had their communications intercepted within the meaning of these laws. Google has not been found to have violated any of them, and it denies the allegations.
Who Could Be Affected?
If the case proceeds, the proposed class could be enormous. It is described as U.S. Google account holders whose private Gmail, Chat, and/or Meet communications were accessed by Gemini after smart features were enabled. One estimate cited in reporting on the filing puts the potential class at roughly 130 million U.S. Gmail users, though the exact class definition, time period, and which users are covered will be shaped as the litigation develops. No class has been certified.What Are Plaintiffs Seeking?
The complaint seeks statutory damages, an injunction to stop the alleged practice and require genuine opt-in consent, and the deletion of any data the plaintiffs say was improperly collected. California's CIPA allows statutory damages of $5,000 per violation (or three times actual damages), and the federal Stored Communications Act provides its own statutory damages. Because the case is unresolved, no money is available now, and any recovery is uncertain unless and until plaintiffs prevail or a settlement is reached.Where the Case Stands (October 2026)
The lawsuit was filed on November 11, 2025, and an amended complaint the next day added a second named plaintiff. Google moved to dismiss in January 2026, both for lack of standing and for failure to state a claim. The case had been reassigned to U.S. District Judge Noël Wise in San Jose, who decided the motion without a hearing.Why the Court Dismissed the First Complaint
On July 7, 2026, Judge Wise granted Google’s motion with leave to amend. The ruling turned entirely on standing — whether the plaintiffs had shown a concrete injury of their own — and did not decide whether Google’s conduct violated any of the privacy laws in the complaint. The order found:- No concrete harm alleged. Citing the Ninth Circuit’s 2025 decision in Popa v. Microsoft and the Supreme Court’s TransUnion v. Ramirez, the court said a claimed statutory violation is not enough on its own; the plaintiffs had to show they were actually harmed.
- Missing basics. The complaint did not say when the plaintiffs opened their accounts, whether they used Google before October 10, 2025, where that date came from, whether Gemini features were already on when the accounts were created, or whether they had since turned the features off. Nothing in it showed the features were not already on by default before October 10.
- No sign their own data was touched. Most importantly, the court said, the plaintiffs described the kinds of information Gemini could reach but did not identify any personal data it actually accessed or used, or point to signs of that use such as personalized suggestions or changes in their services. Alleging that Gemini could track their data was not enough.
- No basis for an injunction. The plaintiffs had not shown a real threat of future harm, and the court quoted Google’s point that users can remove the risk by turning the feature off.
The Second Amended Complaint
The plaintiffs refiled on August 18, 2026. The new complaint reads as a direct answer to the standing ruling. It adds a third named plaintiff, from Washington state, and gives each plaintiff’s account history: when the accounts were opened (as early as about 1999), that none of them recalls turning smart features on, and what each saw. One describes AI-style “Did you mean…?” suggestions in Gmail search; another says they found smart features switched on after reading a social-media post about it; the third says they found the features on in two active accounts and in a dormant account they had not opened in at least two years, took screenshots and filed a complaint with the FTC. To meet the future-harm point, it alleges that data already accessed may be kept and used for AI training or advertising, and that Google could switch the settings back on. It also reworks the case’s theory:- Timing. Instead of a specific October 10, 2025 switch-on date, the new complaint alleges Google enabled the settings “in or around the fall of 2025,” and says the exact timing is known only to Google.
- “Dark patterns.” It alleges that turning the features off takes two separate toggles, that the setting still reads as an opt-in (“When you turn this setting on…”) although it is already on, and that opting out also removes unrelated tools such as spell check and Gmail’s tabbed inbox. It relies on the California Consumer Privacy Act’s definition of a dark pattern to argue that any consent obtained this way does not count.
- Different treatment abroad. Citing press reports, it alleges the same features are off by default for users in the EU, the UK and Switzerland, where opt-in consent is required.
- AI training and human review. On information and belief, it alleges that email content scanned by Gemini may be used to train Google’s higher-tier models and may be seen by human reviewers. The complaint itself notes that Google says user data is not used to train its base models.
- New and changed claims. It adds a claim under California’s Unfair Competition Law and recasts the Stored Communications Act claim around the statute’s bar on a provider divulging the contents of stored communications.
The parties filed a joint case management statement on September 25, and on September 29, 2026, Google filed a new motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, with a request for judicial notice. A September 30 clerk’s notice took the October 13 case management conference off calendar and set a new videoconference date. None of the allegations has been proven, and the court has not yet ruled on the new motion.
The case is one of the first big tests of whether decades-old wiretapping laws reach an AI assistant built into everyday email and messaging. It sits alongside a wave of similar AI-and-privacy disputes, including the since-dismissed Perplexity AI chat-tracking class action, the consolidated Otter.ai AI-notetaker wiretap class action, and the Apple Siri voice-assistant privacy settlement. A separate case over Gemini, the Reyes Gemini subscription pricing lawsuit, was voluntarily dismissed.
How to Check or Turn Off Gemini's Smart Features
Whatever happens in court, you can review these settings yourself today. The exact labels and locations change over time, so treat the steps below as a starting point and check Google's current help pages if something looks different.- In Gmail on the web, open Settings (the gear icon) and choose See all settings.
- On the General tab, find Smart features and switch it off.
- In the same area, open Google Workspace smart features and switch off smart features in Google Workspace and in other Google products.
- For a wider review, open your Google Account and go to Data & privacy to check activity controls and any Gemini-related settings.
The second amended complaint says both toggles have to be off to stop the features, and that switching them off also removes tools such as spell check and the tabbed inbox. Google’s labels change over time, so its current help pages are the place to check if a setting looks different.
Is There Anything to File?
No. There is no certified class, no settlement and no claim form, and a refiled complaint facing a second motion to dismiss is a long way from any of those. If the case ever settles, a court-approved notice will explain who is covered and how to claim. OpenClassActions.com is a consumer news site; it is not a law firm and does not process claims. It is not legal advice.For related coverage, see the $68M Google Assistant privacy settlement and the Google Incognito private-browsing privacy case.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Google Gemini Gmail lawsuit about?
The class action Thele v. Google LLC (N.D. Cal.) alleges that on or around October 10, 2025, Google switched on its Gemini AI "smart features" by default across Gmail, Google Chat, and Google Meet, allowing the AI to access users' private communications without their consent. Plaintiffs say this amounts to unlawful wiretapping and eavesdropping under the California Invasion of Privacy Act and other privacy laws. These are unproven allegations; Google disputes them and says its smart features are optional and user-controlled.
Is Gemini reading my Gmail?
The lawsuit alleges Google's "smart features and personalization" settings let Gemini access Gmail, Chat, and Meet content by default. Google disputes that characterization and says these features are long-standing, optional, and controlled by the user. Whether the feature is active on your account depends on your settings. You can review and turn off "smart features and personalization" in Gmail's settings and in your Google Account's Data & privacy controls; exact labels can change over time.
Is there a Google Gemini settlement or claim form yet?
No. The case is at the complaint stage. There is no certified class, no settlement, and no claim form. The court dismissed the first amended complaint in July 2026, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint in August, and Google moved to dismiss that complaint on September 29, 2026. There is nothing to file at this time.
How do I turn off Gemini's smart features in Gmail?
In Gmail on the web, open Settings (the gear icon), choose "See all settings," and look for the "Smart features and personalization" controls, which you can switch off. You can also review related controls under your Google Account at Data & privacy. The exact wording and location of these settings can change, so check Google's current help pages if you cannot find them.
Who could be covered by the Google Gemini class action?
The complaint seeks to represent a nationwide class of U.S. Google account holders whose private Gmail, Chat, and/or Meet communications were accessed by Gemini after smart features were enabled. The exact class definition and time period will be shaped as the case proceeds. No class has been certified.
Sources
• Thele v. Google LLC, No. 5:25-cv-09704 (N.D. Cal.) — docket via Justia• The National Law Review — analysis of the Gemini smart-features class action complaint
• Insurance Journal / Bloomberg Law — coverage of the filing (Nov. 12, 2025)
• Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 35 (July 7, 2026); stipulation and order extending the amended-complaint deadline, ECF No. 38 (July 16, 2026); Second Amended Class Action Complaint, ECF No. 39 (Aug. 18, 2026); Google’s motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, ECF No. 43 (Sept. 29, 2026) — via the CourtListener docket
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Refiled after July 2026 dismissal — new motion to dismiss pending
Case Title
Thele v. Google LLC
Case Number
5:25-cv-09704
Court
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose)
Date Filed
November 11, 2025
Judge
U.S. District Judge Noël Wise
Claims
CIPA · CDAFA · CA constitutional privacy · intrusion upon seclusion · Stored Communications Act · UCL
Official Source
Justia Docket
