Frank v. Gaos

Frank v. Gaos was a United States Supreme Court case argued in 2018 and decided on March 20, 2019. It challenged a class action settlement against Google for alleged privacy violations where search queries were disclosed to third-party websites through referrer headers. The proposed settlement provided $8.3 million, but no compensation to class members; most funds went to third-party cy pres recipients and attorneys' fees. Objector Theodore H. Frank appealed, arguing that the settlement was unfair and that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because they suffered no concrete injury. The Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's approval and remanded the case, directing the lower court to first determine whether any named plaintiff had standing.

The Supreme Court issued a per curiam decision vacating the judgment of the Ninth Circuit and remanding the case for further proceedings. The Court instructed the lower court to address the threshold issue of whether any named plaintiff had Article III standing before assessing the settlement's fairness or the propriety of the cy pres distribution.

Whether a class action settlement that distributes funds entirely through cy pres to third parties and provides no direct benefit to class members can be approved, and whether the named plaintiffs possess Article III standing to seek such relief without demonstrating a concrete injury.

The ruling tightened scrutiny over no-injury class action settlements and significantly limited the use of cy pres-only remedies. It emphasized that standing is a mandatory constitutional prerequisite, influencing subsequent class action litigation by discouraging settlements that fail to provide meaningful relief to class members and reinforcing the need for concrete harm.