Published
May 31, 2025
Updated
July 29, 2026
This settlement resolves claims that Google overcharged U.S. advertisers in its AdWords program between 2004 and 2012 — billing them for clicks that came from outside the locations they targeted, and trimming the Smart Pricing discounts owed on bundled Search and Display Network clicks. The court granted final approval of the $100 million fund on August 29, 2025, and the claim window closed on October 31, 2025.
Current Status
Claims are closed. The Payment Form deadline was extended to October 31, 2025, and new submissions are no longer accepted. The final approval hearing was held on August 21, 2025, and the court entered an order granting final approval of the $100 million settlement on August 29, 2025. The court also directed the parties to file a post-distribution accounting no later than May 18, 2026. As of July 29, 2026, no payment date had been announced and no confirmation that distribution to approved claimants is complete had been located in public sources. Anyone who filed should rely on the official settlement website and on communications tied to their own submission.StatusFinal Approval Granted August 29, 2025Post-distribution accounting was due May 18, 2026; no completion notice located as of July 29, 2026.
Claim DeadlineOctober 31, 2025Extended from the original August 15, 2025 date · New Payment Forms are not accepted.
Settlement Fund$100,000,000Pro rata share of the net fund · $1.00 minimum payment · $30 million in fees awarded to class counsel
Proof RequiredYesA Notice ID and Confirmation Code from the notice, or a Google Customer ID, was needed to file.
What Was the Case About?
This was a long-running certified class action over how Google billed advertisers in its AdWords program, now called Google Ads. Plaintiffs alleged two separate kinds of overcharge.The first involved location targeting. The complaint claimed that advertisers who limited a campaign to a particular geographic area were still charged for clicks that did not originate from the location they had selected.
The second involved Smart Pricing, the discount Google applied to clicks served on its Display Network. Plaintiffs alleged that Google manipulated the Smart Pricing formula by applying an arbitrary 6 percent boost to its Smart Pricing measurements between June 1, 2009 and December 13, 2012, so that advertisers whose ads ran across both the Search and Display Networks received less than the discount they had bargained for.
The settlement resolves those claims without any admission of wrongdoing by Google, and the court did not decide in favor of either side. The parties agreed to the $100 million payment to end more than a decade of litigation. The case is captioned Cabrera v. Google LLC, No. 5:11-cv-01263-EJD, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division; it was formerly captioned Woods v. Google LLC.
Who Was Covered?
There were two classes, and an advertiser could qualify for one or both of them.• Location Targeting Class: persons and entities in the United States who, between January 1, 2004 and March 22, 2011, advertised through the Google AdWords program and paid for clicks on their ads where those clicks did not originate from the location the advertiser selected.
• Search Bundled Clicks Class: persons and entities in the United States who, between June 1, 2009 and December 13, 2012, paid for Search Bundled Clicks — Display Network clicks bundled together with Search Network clicks where the advertiser had not placed a separate Display Network bid.
How Much Could Claimants Get?
There was no fixed per-advertiser amount. Each approved claimant was to receive a pro rata share of the Net Settlement Fund, allocated using damages figures developed by the experts in the case, with a minimum payment of $1.00. The net fund is what remains of the $100 million after court-approved deductions. The court granted the fee motion in part and awarded $30 million in attorneys' fees, with further deductions covering litigation expenses, a service award and administration costs. Because the allocation is pro rata, the amount an individual advertiser receives depends on that advertiser's share of the assessed damages and on how many valid submissions were approved across both classes.What Proof Was Required?
Filing required an administrator-issued identifier. Class members who received a personalized notice submitted the Payment Form using the Notice ID and Confirmation Code printed on it. Advertisers without a personalized notice could file using their Google Customer ID, the account number tied to their AdWords account. Receipts and invoices were not requested, but because a code from the notice or a Google account identifier was needed to submit the form, this page is marked Proof Required: Yes.How Payments Were to Be Delivered
Claimants could select a physical check, a virtual prepaid MasterCard, Venmo, or an ACH transfer to a bank account. The virtual prepaid card was the default where no method was chosen.That default drew scrutiny. At the August 21, 2025 hearing the court declined to rule immediately, raising questions about how prominently the settlement website presented the prepaid card relative to the other options, the fee terms attached to the card — including a monthly inactivity fee that could begin after twelve months — and what financial interest the settlement administrator had in that payment channel. The court sought further disclosure before entering its order, which it granted on August 29, 2025. Prepaid card distribution was to be handled through a third-party digital payments vendor.
What Happens Next?
With final approval entered, the remaining steps are administration of the approved submissions and distribution of the net fund. The court required the parties to file a post-distribution accounting by May 18, 2026, including the number of submissions the administrator identified as fraudulent, and set a compliance date of May 28, 2026 to confirm that the filing was made. No payment date had been announced as of July 29, 2026, and no notice that the distribution is complete had been located. Updates are posted on the official settlement website.Official information is available at AdWords Clicks Class Action.
Important Dates
• Location Targeting Class period: January 1, 2004 – March 22, 2011• Search Bundled Clicks Class period: June 1, 2009 – December 13, 2012
• Exclusion and objection deadline: July 20, 2025
• Final approval hearing: August 21, 2025
• Final approval granted: August 29, 2025
• Payment Form deadline, as extended: October 31, 2025
• Post-distribution accounting due: May 18, 2026
Other Google Class Actions
Google has resolved or is defending several other class actions tracked on this site, each with its own eligibility rules. The $700 million Google Play Store antitrust settlement covers app and in-app purchases rather than advertising spend, and the Incognito private browsing case concerns data collected while users browsed in private mode. Neither overlaps with this advertiser settlement.Sources
• Official settlement website: AdWords Clicks Class Action• Order granting motion for final settlement approval and granting in part motion for attorneys' fees, expenses and service award, entered August 29, 2025 (N.D. Cal.)
• Class notices and settlement agreement filed in Cabrera v. Google LLC, No. 5:11-cv-01263-EJD
• Courthouse News Service reporting on the August 2025 final approval proceedings
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Settlement Fund
$100,000,000
Case Title
Cabrera v. Google LLC (formerly Woods v. Google LLC)
Case Number
5:11-cv-01263-EJD
Court
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division
Defendant
Google LLC
Claims
Breach of contract over AdWords location targeting and Smart Pricing discounts
Claim Deadline
October 31, 2025
Extended from August 15, 2025.
Final Approval Hearing
August 21, 2025
Status
Final Approval Granted August 29, 2025
No payment date announced as of July 29, 2026.
Official Website
AdWords Clicks Class Action
