Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 JULY 2026

Another Internet Tracking Class Action Failed At Certification—Here’s Why It Matters

Ballard Spahr LLP
Ballard Spahr LLP
Contributor
Ballard Spahr LLP

Ballard Spahr LLP

Ballard Spahr LLP, an AmLaw 100 law firm with 19 US offices, serves clients in more than 50...

View firm profile
Explore more from Ballard Spahr LLP

Wiretapping class actions based on websites’ use of common tracking technologies continue to rise. And because many courts have allowed these cases to survive motions to dismiss, businesses often feel pressure...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Wiretapping class actions based on websites’ use of common tracking technologies continue to rise. And because many courts have allowed these cases to survive motions to dismiss, businesses often feel pressure to settle early—even when they have strong defenses.

Much of that pressure comes from the threat of a class wide judgment reaching eight or nine figures. However, a trend is emerging that could affect whether businesses should decide to defend instead of settle: courts are showing increasing skepticism that wiretapping claims are as suitable for class treatment as plaintiffs’ lawyers suggest.

A federal court in the Northern District of California recently denied class certification in Ingraham v. Capital One Financial Corp., No. 24-cv-05985-TLT (N.D. Cal. June 16, 2026). The plaintiffs alleged that tracking technologies used on the defendant’s website enabled third parties to intercept users’ personal and financial data without consent. The plaintiffs’ claims survived an early

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from