Published
September 22, 2026
Zoom users who received a settlement payment notice in September 2026 are most likely not being paid from either of the two well-known Zoom class actions, both of which closed to claims and were distributed earlier. The money arriving now traces to a separate Illinois biometric privacy effort that was pursued as individual claims rather than as a class action, and it is closed to new participants.
What Is This About?
Readers are reporting Zoom settlement payment notices landing in their inboxes this month, and asking which case the money is from. The answer is the part most of the coverage has wrong: it is almost certainly not from either Zoom class action people remember.There have been three separate legal efforts against Zoom Video Communications, and they resolved in three different ways. Two were class actions with public dockets, court-approved settlements and official notice websites. Both closed to claims and paid out before this month. The third was pursued as individual claims under Illinois biometric privacy law, outside the class action system entirely — and that is the one now sending payments.
Because that third effort was never certified as a class, there is no public case number to look up, no docket entry to read and no court-approved settlement website to check a notice against. OpenClassActions searched for one and could not find it, which is the expected result rather than a gap in the record. That absence is the single most useful thing for a reader to understand, and it is covered below.
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.
Status
Payments Reported · Closed to New Claimants
Which Matter Is Paying
Illinois biometric privacy claims
A separate effort — not the $150M investor case, not the $85M consumer case
Can I Claim?
No — all three Zoom matters are closed
The Third Matter: Illinois Biometric Privacy Claims
Illinois has the strictest biometric privacy law in the country. The Biometric Information Privacy Act requires a private company to obtain written consent before collecting a person’s biometric identifiers, including a scan of face geometry, and it lets individuals sue on their own behalf. It sets statutory damages of $1,000 for a negligent violation and $5,000 for one that is intentional or reckless — which is why claims under it are worth pursuing one person at a time.The allegation against Zoom was that users who turned on their camera during a video call had facial geometry collected without the consent Illinois law requires. That was an allegation. It was never tested at trial, no court found Zoom liable, and resolving a claim is not an admission of wrongdoing.
What makes this different from the two class actions is the structure. Rather than one lawsuit covering everyone automatically, Illinois residents were recruited to sign up individually, and their claims were filed and resolved as individual matters. Recipients of a payment notice from this effort had to have signed up for it at some earlier point — it does not reach people who never enrolled. The firms that ran the recruitment now describe it as closed to new clients.
OpenClassActions is not publishing the terms of the notices readers have shared. Individually resolved claims are typically subject to confidentiality obligations that fall on the recipient, and reprinting the specifics could put a reader in breach of an agreement they signed. Anyone with questions about their own notice should raise them with the firm or administrator they originally enrolled through.
Why There Is No Official Website to Check
This is the question that generates the most anxiety, because the standard consumer-protection advice is to verify a settlement notice against the official court-approved website — and here there is not one.A class action settlement requires a judge to approve it. That approval process generates a public docket, a written notice plan and a court-supervised website carrying the case number, the deadlines and the claim terms. Anyone can check a notice against it. Claims resolved individually skip all of that, because there is no class to notify and no court approval to obtain. The resolution is private, so nothing about it is published.
The practical consequence is that the usual verification route does not exist for this one. The alternative is to work backwards through the relationship that already exists: a recipient signed up with someone at some point, and that firm can confirm whether a notice is theirs using contact details the reader already has, rather than any contact details printed in the message itself.
The $150 Million Investor Settlement Closed Last Year
The largest Zoom settlement is the securities case, and it is the one most often misidentified in posts circulating this month. Zoom agreed to pay $150 million to resolve Drieu v. Zoom Video Communications, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-02353-JD, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California before Judge James Donato. Zoom disclosed the agreement to the Securities and Exchange Commission.Investors alleged Zoom made false or misleading statements about the security of its service — in particular that meetings were protected by end-to-end encryption when they were not — and that the share price fell when that was corrected. Zoom resolved the case without any admission of liability.
Two things rule this case out as the source of a payment notice today. First, it covered investors who bought Zoom securities between April 18, 2019 and April 6, 2020 — not people who used the app. Second, the calendar: claims closed September 16, 2025; Judge Donato entered final approval and approved the plan of allocation on November 10, 2025, and the docket closed the case the same day; the administrator then filed a post-distribution accounting on July 31, 2026, a filing the court requires after the money has gone out. On the way there, a November 4, 2025 order cut the fee award to just over $10 million against a request of roughly $28 million, which left more of the fund for investors.
Securities settlements are also paid pro rata against recognized losses calculated from brokerage records supplied on a claim form. They do not arrive as one-click payment emails.
The $85 Million Consumer Case Paid in 2023
The case most people picture when they hear about a Zoom payout is In re Zoom Video Communications, Inc. Privacy Litigation, No. 3:20-cv-02155, also in the Northern District of California, before Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler. It resolved claims that Zoom shared user data with third parties, misstated its encryption and failed to prevent uninvited meeting intrusions.That class covered people who used Zoom Meetings between March 30, 2016 and July 30, 2021, and its claim deadline was March 5, 2022 — which ends most speculation, since nobody has been able to file in it for more than four years. Under the settlement terms, paid subscribers were in line for 15% of their subscription or $25, whichever was larger, and other class members for roughly $15.
The administrator sent digital payment notices beginning May 31, 2023, claimable through September 28, 2023. Those emails were legitimate at the time, and were fact-checked in 2023 precisely because so many recipients assumed they were phishing. The window closed three years ago.
How to Judge a Payment Notice
The structural facts above do most of the work. Both class actions are closed, so any message inviting someone to file a new Zoom claim is not describing either of them. A notice tied to the Illinois effort should correspond to an enrollment the recipient actually remembers.Beyond that, the ordinary tests apply and they are reliable. Legitimate administrators do not charge a fee to release a payment. They do not need a Social Security number or a bank login delivered through a link in an email. And no genuine payment program makes eligibility contingent on a recipient declining to report or forward the message — a payment that is owed is owed regardless of what the recipient does with the email.
Anyone uncertain should verify through a channel they already control rather than one the message supplies.
Questions
I received a Zoom settlement payment notice. Which case is it from?
Most likely none of the two well-known Zoom class actions. The $150 million investor settlement and the $85 million consumer privacy settlement are both closed and were distributed earlier. Payment notices arriving in September 2026 are associated with a separate Illinois biometric privacy matter that was pursued as individual claims rather than as a class action.
Why is there no official website for the Zoom payments arriving now?
Because the claims were not resolved as a certified class action. A class settlement requires court approval, a public docket and a court-approved notice website. Claims brought individually are resolved privately, so there is no public case number, no docket entry and no official settlement site to check them against.
Can I still file a claim in any Zoom matter?
No. The investor settlement closed to claims on September 16, 2025. The consumer privacy settlement closed on March 5, 2022. The Illinois biometric privacy effort is described by the firms that ran it as closed to new participants.
What were the Illinois biometric privacy allegations about?
The claims alleged that Zoom users who turned on their camera during a video call had facial geometry collected without the written consent Illinois law requires. These were allegations. They were not tested at trial and no court found Zoom liable.
How can I tell a real payment notice from a phishing attempt?
Payment notices do not ask for a fee to release money, and they do not need a Social Security number or a bank login supplied through a link. A notice for a genuine claim will match a claim the recipient actually submitted. Anyone unsure should contact the law firm or administrator they originally dealt with using contact details they already have, rather than details supplied in the message.
Sources
- Zoom Video Communications, Form 8-K, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission — the $150.0 million settlement, the case number and the class period.
- Docket, Drieu v. Zoom Video Communications, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-02353 (N.D. Cal.) — final approval and plan of allocation (Nov. 10, 2025), fee order (Nov. 4, 2025), post-distribution accounting (July 31, 2026).
- Bloomberg Law: Zoom Judge Approves $150 Million Investors Deal, Cuts Legal Fees.
- Illinois General Assembly: Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14 — the written-consent requirement and the $1,000 / $5,000 statutory damages.
- Snopes fact-check of the 2023 Zoom settlement payment emails.
- Official settlement website, In re Zoom Video Communications, Inc. Privacy Litigation.
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Settled — Fund Distributed (investor case)
Case Title
Drieu v. Zoom Video Communications, Inc.
Case Number
3:20-cv-02353-JD
Court
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
Date Filed
April 7, 2020
Official Website
Zoom Securities Settlement
