[Enforcement library](/enforcement)

# Calhoun v. Google

The Ninth Circuit required consent to be assessed against the particular conduct and the disclosures a reasonable user would understand. It returned the Chrome data-collection dispute for further proceedings.

US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit · California privacy and federal interception claims

- Case record
- What this record establishes
- Checks for your own systems
- Sources and limits

## Case record

| Fact | Record |
| --- | --- |
| Authority or court | US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Law or issue | California privacy and federal interception claims |
| Case number | 22-16993 |
| Procedural record | Summary judgment reversed and remanded |
| Opinion or order | 20 August 2024 |
| Source reviewed | 16 October 2026 |

[Court opinion or order](https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/08/20/22-16993.pdf)

## What this record establishes

This page describes the cited opinion or order. A dismissal, pleading decision, standing ruling or jurisdiction decision has a different scope from a merits judgment. Later proceedings and appeals may change the position. Unpublished and nonprecedential decisions are identified in the status where applicable.

## Checks for your own systems

Inth’s technical interpretation: use this case to choose what evidence to collect in your own implementation. These checks are not instructions issued by the court or regulator.

- Keep the exact notice, screen sequence and version the user saw.
- Match each claimed consent to the particular collection, purpose and recipient.
- Check how notice and assent work on mobile, during sign-up and in embedded flows.

> **Limits of technical evidence**
> A browser capture can show a transfer. It cannot establish every server operation, the terms of a contract or whether a law applies. Compare observed behaviour with the relevant disclosures and legal assessment.

## Sources and limits

[Court opinion or order](https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2024/08/20/22-16993.pdf)

Source review: 16 October 2026. This record covers the cited source and procedural stage. It does not audit the organisation’s present implementation or establish every later legal development.

[Browse the enforcement library](/enforcement)