Filed under Seal

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Civil Division

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
a municipal corporation
441 4th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001,

Plaintiff, Case No.:

v.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
GOOGLE LLC,
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway,
Mountain View, California, 94043,

Defendant.

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION

PROCEDURES ACT
 Filed under Seal

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
PARTIES ............................................................................................................................ 3
JURISDICTION AND VENUE ......................................................................................... 4
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ............................................................................................. 4
A. Google’s Business Model Relies on Constant Surveillance of Google Users. ....... 4
1. Google Collects Location Data Via the Android OS and Google Apps and
Services. ............................................................................................................... 5
2. Location Data Is Highly Valuable to Google. .................................................... 6
B. Google Users Must Navigate Numerous, Conflicting Controls to Protect Their
Location Data. ................................................................................................................ 7
1. Location-Related Google Account Settings........................................................ 7
2. Location-Related Device Settings....................................................................... 9
C. Google Deceives Users Regarding Their Ability to Protect Their Privacy Through
Google Account Settings. ............................................................................................. 11
1. Google Misrepresented and Omitted Material Facts Regarding the Location
History and Web & App Activity Settings. ....................................................... 11
2. Google Misrepresents and Omits Material Facts Regarding Users’ Ability to
Control Their Privacy through Google Account Settings. ................................. 17
3. Google Misrepresented and Omitted Material Facts Regarding the Google Ad
Personalization Setting....................................................................................... 21
D. Google Deceives Users Regarding Their Ability to Protect Their Privacy Through
Device Settings. ............................................................................................................ 22
E. Google Uses Deceptive Practices that Undermine Users’ Ability to Make
Informed Choices About Their Data ............................................................................ 24
1. Dark Patterns in Google Account Settings ....................................................... 24
2. Dark Patterns in Device Settings. ..................................................................... 29
F. Google Engages in Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices in the District ............ 32
CAUSES OF ACTION ..................................................................................................... 32
PRAYER FOR RELIEF ................................................................................................... 36
JURY DEMAND .............................................................................................................. 36

i
 Filed under Seal

INTRODUCTION

This is an action by the above-captioned plaintiff, the District of Columbia (the

“District”), by and through the Office of the Attorney General, against Defendant Google LLC

(“Google” or the “Company”) for the Company’s use of deceptive and unfair practices to obtain

valuable consumer location data, in violation of the District’s Consumer Protection Procedures

Act (“CPPA”), D.C. Code § 28-3901, et seq.

Since at least 2014, Google has deceived consumers regarding how their location

is tracked and used by the Company and consumers’ ability to protect their privacy by stopping

this tracking. Google leads consumers to believe that consumers are in control of whether Google

collects and retains information about their location and how that information is used. In reality,

consumers who use Google products cannot prevent Google from collecting, storing, and profiting

from their location.

Google is primarily known as a technology company that provides a range of

consumer products, including web-based services and applications (like Gmail and the Google

Search engine) and hardware such as Pixel and Nexus smartphones. The majority of Google’s

revenues, however, derive from digital advertising. To support this lucrative arm of its business,

Google harvests consumers’ personal data, including location data, when consumers use Google

products. In turn, Google uses this data to “target” advertisements to consumers and to evaluate

the effectiveness of these advertisements.

Location data is among the most sensitive information Google collects from

consumers. Even a limited amount of such data, gathered over time, can expose a person’s identity

and routines. Location can also be used to infer personal details such as political or religious

affiliation, sexual orientation, income, health status, or participation in support groups, as well as

major life events, such as marriage, divorce, and the birth of children.
Location data is even more powerful in the hands of Google, a company that has

an unprecedented ability to monitor consumers’ daily lives due to the near ubiquity of Google

1
 Filed under Seal

products in consumers’ pockets, homes, and workplaces—essentially everywhere consumers go.

Google’s technologies allow it to analyze massive amounts of location data from billions of people,

and to derive insights that consumers may not even realize they revealed. Google uses this window

into consumers’ lives to sell advertising that is “targeted” to consumers according to personal

details Google has learned about them, including their demographics, habits, and interests.

Google has a powerful financial incentive to obscure the details of its location data

collection practices and to make it difficult for consumers to opt out of being tracked. Google’s

ability to amass data about consumers translates to better advertising capabilities and a greater

share of the multi-billion-dollar digital advertising market. Google has generated tens of millions

of dollars of advertising revenues from ads presented to consumers in the District alone.
The Company’s exhaustive surveillance practices are most effective, and therefore

most lucrative, where consumers have no clear idea how to limit Google’s access to their personal

information. The District files this suit to correct the deceptive and unfair practices that Google

has used and uses to obtain consumers’ location data, and to ensure that consumers are able to

understand and control the extent to which their location data is accessed, stored, used, and

monetized by the Company.

Some of the issues giving rise to this lawsuit became broadly known to the public

on August 13, 2018, when the Associated Press (“AP”) revealed in an article that Google “records

your movements even when you explicitly tell it not to.” The reporting concerned Google’s

“Location History” setting, a user control which allows Google to track a consumer’s location.

Google promised consumers that “with Location History off, the places you go are no longer

stored.”

The AP story exposed that Google’s promise to consumers was false. Even when

consumers explicitly opted out of location tracking by turning the Location History setting off,

Google nevertheless recorded consumers’ locations via other means, including (but not limited to)

a separate setting called “Web & App Activity.” Web & App Activity collects and stores data

2
 Filed under Seal

about a consumer, including location data, when the consumer interacts with Google products and

services. Although the Web & App Activity setting is automatically turned “on” for all Google

Accounts, the Company’s disclosures during Google Account creation did not mention or draw

consumers’ attention to the setting until approximately 2018.

In the days following the AP report,

Even

Google employees expressed surprise upon learning that the Company was collecting location data

under the auspices of the seemingly unrelated Web & App Activity setting.
The District subsequently commenced an investigation into Google’s location

tracking practices. The District’s investigation revealed that Google also offers other settings that

purport to give consumers control over the location data Google collects and uses. But Google’s

misleading, ambiguous, and incomplete descriptions of these settings all but guarantee that

consumers will not understand when their location is collected and retained by Google or for what

purposes. And, in reality, regardless of the settings they select, consumers who use Google

products have no option but to allow the Company to collect, store, and use their location.

With this suit, the District seeks to put a stop to Google’s deceptive and unfair

practices; to ensure that consumers are no longer coerced into trading away their privacy; to force

Google to disgorge all profits and benefits obtained from its unlawful practices; and to impose

civil penalties for Google’s violations of the CPPA.

PARTIES

Plaintiff the District of Columbia, a municipal corporation empowered to sue and

be sued, is the local government for the territory constituting the seat of the government for the

United States. The District brings this action through its chief legal officer, the Attorney General

for the District of Columbia. The Attorney General has general charge and conduct of all legal

business of the District and all suits initiated by and against the District and is responsible for

3
 Filed under Seal

upholding the public interest. D.C. Code § 1-301.81(a)(1). The Attorney General is specifically

authorized to enforce the District’s consumer protection laws, including the CPPA.

Google LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of

business at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, California, 94043.

Google is a technology company that specializes in Internet-related products and

services, which include online advertising technologies, search, cloud computing, and other

software and hardware. Google markets, advertises, offers, and provides its products and services

throughout the United States, and to consumers in the District.

At all relevant times Google acted with the knowledge and understanding that the

activities described in this Complaint would affect users of Google’s products and services

throughout the United States, including in the District.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case pursuant to D.C.

Code §§ 11-921 and 28-3909.

This Court has personal jurisdiction over Google pursuant to D.C. Code § 13-

423(a).
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A. Google’s Business Model Relies on Constant Surveillance of Google Users.

Google is an advertising company, but its business is user1 data. Through its many

consumer products and services, Google collects and analyzes the personal data of billions of

people. In turn, the Company uses this information to build user profiles and provide analytics that

support Google’s digital advertising business. On information and belief, Google’s advertising

products generated nearly $150 billion in revenue in 2020.

1
For purposes of this Complaint, the terms “consumer” and “user” are used interchangeably to
refer to a consumer who has used or uses Google’s products and services.

4
 Filed under Seal

1. Google Collects Location Data Via the Android OS and Google Apps and
Services.

Much of Google’s location data collection occurs by way of Google’s Android

operating system (“Android” or “Android OS”). Android has been used on a majority of

smartphones in the United States since approximately 2015.2 The Android operating system is free

and open-source software. However, most Android devices on the market include a suite of Google

applications (“apps”) and application programming interfaces (“APIs”)3 (collectively, “Google

Mobile Services”) that are preinstalled on a user’s device pursuant to licensing agreements

between Google and Android device manufacturers (“OEMs”).

The basic functioning of the Android OS provides Google with a steady stream of

location data from Android devices. Through sensors and APIs installed on Android devices,4

Google can track the precise location of a device on a continuous basis, using GPS coordinates,

cell tower data, Wi-Fi signals, and other signals that the device transmits to Google.

Beyond Android devices, Google collects location data through other consumer

products including apps and web-based services, such as Google Search, Google Maps, Chrome

web browser, YouTube, Google Play Store, and Google Assistant, many of which can be accessed

on both Android and Apple iOS devices (such as iPhones), as well as through web browsers. These

products are critical to Google’s ability to extract location data. Google collects and stores users’

location data when they interact with certain Google apps and services, even when a user’s location
is not needed to support the core functionality of the app or service.
On Android devices, certain Google apps are granted permission to collect users’

location data by default; other Google apps ask permission from users to allow Google to collect

2
The smartphone market is generally split between two operating systems, Apple’s “iOS” and
Google’s Android OS. Apple’s iOS is used on all iPhone and iPad devices.
3
An API is a software interface that connects computers or pieces of software to each other.
4
As used herein, the term “Android device” refers to mobile devices that use Google’s Android
OS and that come pre-installed with Google-licensed software and APIs (Google Mobile
Services), including the Google Play Store and Google Play Services API.

5
 Filed under Seal

location data. On many versions of Android, once Google apps are permitted to collect a user’s

location data, they may continue to transmit that data to Google unless the user remembers to

revoke permission. And if a user declines to grant permission, an app may continue to prompt the

user to enable location-related permission settings.

On Android devices, a user can also disable a “master switch” location setting that

controls whether the device transmits location data from device sensors to Google. However, if a

user takes this step, they cannot use any location-enabled services on their device, including

location-enabled services on non-Google apps (such as Uber). In addition, the user is not fully

shielded from tracking by Google. Google still continues to estimate a user’s location by using IP

address5 information that is transmitted when the user interacts with Google apps and services.
2. Location Data Is Highly Valuable to Google.

Some Google consumer products can be used at no direct financial cost to the

consumer, but that does not mean that Google provides these products for free. Google collects

exhaustive personal data about its users when they engage with these products. Google then

processes this data to draw inferences about users that it monetizes through advertising.

Google’s advertising business depends on its collection of this personal data, and

location data is particularly valuable information for this business.

In marketing materials directed at advertisers, Google actively publicizes its ability to provide

more effective advertising through geo-targeting and location-based analytics.

Because location data is key to Google’s lucrative advertising business, the

Company has a financial incentive to dissuade users from withholding access to that data. As

detailed herein, Google has employed and continues to employ a number of deceptive and unfair

practices to obtain users’ “consent” to be tracked and to make it nearly impossible for users to stop

5
An IP address is a unique address that identifies a device on the internet or a local
network. IP stands for “Internet Protocol.”

6
 Filed under Seal

Google from collecting their location data. These practices include privacy-intrusive default

location settings, hard-to-find location settings, misleading descriptions of location settings,

repeated nudging to enable location settings, and incomplete disclosures of Google’s location data

collection and processing.

In one striking example, Google dramatically reworded a pop-up window that

prompted users to enable a location-tracking setting so that the prompt no longer stated on its face

that enabling the setting allowed Google to continuously collect the user’s location.

See infra §

E(2). The roll-out of this vague prompt

B. Google Users Must Navigate Numerous, Conflicting Controls to Protect

Their Location Data.

Google users must navigate numerous, conflicting settings that supposedly control

when and how Google collects, stores, and uses their location information. At the highest level,

these settings can be classified into two categories: Google Accounts settings and device settings.

Google Account settings apply to data collected from any device that is signed in6 to a Google

Account. In contrast, device settings apply only to the specific device on which the setting appears

and do not require a user to be signed into a Google Account.

1. Location-Related Google Account Settings.

Google’s collection and use of location data is subject to at least three Google

Account settings: Location History, Web & App Activity, and Google Ad Personalization

(“GAP”).

Location History is a Google Account feature that captures all the places where a

signed-in user goes.

6
A device (or user) is “signed-in” to Google if the user has signed into the user’s Google
Account at device set-up or in connection with a Google app on their device.

7
 Filed under Seal

. Location History has existed

in some form since approximately 2009.

Using those various signals, Google can track a user’s precise location,7

Using this information, Google builds a “private

map” of all the places a user has been, which the user can review and edit.
The value of Location History data for Google, however, lies in its advertising uses.

Google

These inferences inform what advertising Google will present to that user.

In addition, Google uses Location History data to provide advertisers with “store

conversion” rates—i.e., the number of users who have viewed ads and then visited the advertised

store. Google’s ability to track users’ physical locations after they click on digital ads is a unique

selling point for its advertising business.

Web & App Activity is a separate Google Account setting pursuant to which

Google collects, stores, and monetizes users’ locations. Whereas Location History collects

information on all of a user’s movements, Web & App Activity records a signed-in user’s

“transactional location:” that is, the location of a signed-in user’s device when the user interacts

with certain Google products.8

7
As used herein, “precise location” refers to the user’s exact longitude and latitude.
8
A “supplemental” Web & App Activity setting also collects and stores information about the
user’s interactions with non-Google apps and with non-Google websites on Google’s Chrome
browser.

8
 Filed under Seal

For example, when a signed-in user conducts a search for “chocolate chip cookie

recipe” on the Google Search app, Google collects the user’s location at the time of the search,

along with details about the search, and stores that information to the user’s Web & App Activity

log. Later, if the user searches for an address on Google Maps, Google again stores the user’s

location at the time of that search, along with details such as what was searched, to Web & App

Activity. Google uses Web & App Activity data to make deductions about the user for advertising

purposes.

Location History and Web & App Activity are independent settings. Disabling one

setting does not impact whether location data is collected and stored pursuant to the other setting.

This means that even if a user prevents location tracking by one of these services, Google still

tracks and monetizes the user’s location through the other. Until recently, Google kept the data

stored in connection with these settings indefinitely, unless the user manually deleted the data.
Google also offers users a Google Account setting related to personalized

advertising—the GAP setting. The GAP setting purports to provide signed-in users the ability to

opt out of personalized ads served by Google. Google told users that leaving this setting enabled

would mean that, “Google can show you ads based on your activity on Google services (ex: Search,

YouTube), and on websites and apps that partner with Google.” By implication, users who do not

want Google to serve them ads based on their activity on Google services should be able to opt out

by disabling this setting. However, Google continues to target ads to a user based on a user’s

location even if the user opts out of ads personalization by disabling the GAP setting.
2. Location-Related Device Settings.

While the Location History, Web & App Activity, and GAP settings apply across

all devices associated with a user’s Google Account, there are additional settings related to location

data that apply only to a user’s specific device. Location-related device settings control whether a

specific device can transmit location information to apps, APIs, or other services on the user’s

device. Android devices have a number of different location-related device settings.

9
 Filed under Seal

First, Android devices have a location “master switch” that controls whether the

device can share the device’s precise location with any apps or services on the device. When this

“master switch” is enabled, apps and services can access data about the device’s location from

device sensors, such as GPS. If a user disables this setting on their device, no apps or services can

access data from the device’s location sensors.

Second, Android devices have “app-specific” location settings. Using these device

settings, users can grant or deny a specific app, such as Google Maps or Uber, permission to access

data from the device’s location sensors. On some versions of Android, apps with location

permission could access a user’s location in the background (i.e., when the app is not in use).
On Android devices, these two types of settings also control the flow of location

information to Google. For example, enabling the location “master switch” allows Google to

“periodically” collect and use location from the user’s device in order to improve a Google

platform called Google Location Services.9

Android mobile devices also have other settings that purportedly control access to

specific types of location data. For example, Android users can control whether their device scans

for nearby Wi-Fi access points or Bluetooth devices, which can help Google interpret the user’s

location. Certain versions of the Android OS also include “Low Battery” and “High Accuracy”

modes that control whether Google uses Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cellular signals, GPS, or Google

Location Services, to ascertain the user’s precise location.

In order to protect their privacy, users must understand the nuanced and interrelated

functions of Google Account settings and device settings. This complex web of settings misleads

users into believing that they are not sharing their location with Google when in fact they are.

9
Google Location Services is also referred to as Google Location Accuracy.

10
 Filed under Seal

C. Google Deceives Users Regarding Their Ability to Protect Their Privacy

Through Google Account Settings.

One way that Google misleads users regarding their location data is through Google

Account settings. As a result of deceptive and unfair trade practices with respect to these settings,

Google has collected enormous amounts of location data from unwitting users and monetized that

data in the service of Google’s advertising offerings without users’ knowledge or consent.
1. Google Misrepresented and Omitted Material Facts Regarding the
Location History and Web & App Activity Settings.

From at least 2014 to at least 2019, Google made misrepresentations regarding how

the Location History and Web & App Activity settings used and collected location data. These

misrepresentations confused users about which settings implicate location data, enabling Google

to capture, store, and use such data without users’ knowledge or consent.

For years, on a public webpage regarding Location History, Google assured

Android users that “[y]ou can turn off Location History at any time. With Location History off,

the places you go are no longer stored” (emphasis added). Google similarly explained that Apple

users could log into their online Google account and select “Stop storing location” in order to turn

off Location History, and that turning Location History off would “stop[] saving new location

information” (emphasis added). Google thus presented Location History as the setting that

controlled whether Google stored location information about a user.

That representation was deceptive. Even when Location History was off, Google

continued to collect and store users’ locations. Depending on a user’s other settings, Google

collected and stored a user’s location data through Web & App Activity, Google apps on the user’s

device, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth scans from the user’s device, Google’s Location Services feature, the

user’s IP address, and

Google’s statements prompting users to turn on Location History also deceptively

implied that this setting alone allowed Google to store a user’s location. For example, at various

11
 Filed under Seal

times, Google told users that enabling Location History “lets Google save your location;” allows

Google to “store and use” the “places you go;” permits Google to “periodically store your

location;” “allows Google to store a history of your location;” or allows Google “to save and

manage your location information in your account.” These representations omit that Google

collected and saved users’ location data when using Google products whether or not the user

enabled Location History.

Google’s misrepresentations regarding Location History were exacerbated by

separate misrepresentations in connection with the Web & App Activity setting. Google recognizes

that the location of individual users over time constitutes sensitive information. Despite this,

Google did not disclose that the Company collects, stores, and uses location data when Web &

App Activity is enabled.

As alleged above, Web & App Activity collects location data when a user interacts

with certain Google products. For example, if a user asks Google Assistant to search for the author

of a book, Web & App Activity would save the user’s location and the time when the query was

made. Google also collects and stores information that could implicitly reveal a user’s location,

such as which places the user inputs into Google Maps.

The 2018 AP story illustrated the extent of Google’s location tracking through Web

& App Activity. The report provided a visual map of the data Google collected from the AP

investigator’s device when Web & App Activity was enabled but Location History was disabled.

The resulting map reflected that in only eight hours, Google captured almost two dozen precise,

time-stamped GPS coordinates.

Google concealed from users that the Web & App Activity setting controlled

Google’s storage and use of their location information in at least three ways.

First, Google did not disclose the Web & App Activity setting when users set up

Google Accounts for the first time. At this stage, the Web & App Activity setting is defaulted “on”

for new Google Accounts. Thus, a user who sets up a Google Account is automatically opted-in

12
 Filed under Seal

to location tracking via Web & App Activity. Until 2018, the Google Account set-up process made

no mention of the Web & App Activity setting.

Furthermore, Android phones effectively require a user to sign in to a Google

Account.10 In addition, Google apps like Search and Maps were (and are) granted location

permission on Android devices by default. As a result, Google could track Android users’ location

without ever presenting users with an option to opt out.

One of the only ways users would become aware that Web & App Activity was

storing location data was by navigating to a separate webpage called “My Activity” where Google

recorded data stored under the Web & App Activity setting. But when users first landed on this

webpage, Location History was presented as the only setting that related to location data. See:

Fig. 1 (“Places you’ve been[:] Google Location History lets Google save your location to
provide benefits like improved map searches and tailored commute information.”)

10
A user must sign in to a Google Account on their Android device to access the Google Play app
store, which is needed to download new apps or to receive app updates that enable apps to continue
to function properly and safely. Once Android users sign into their Google Account, users must
fully remove their Google Account(s) from their device in order to sign their device out of Google.

13
 Filed under Seal

In 2018, Google revised its Google Account set-up process to reference Web &

App Activity. However, the Company continued to conceal from new users that location data was

captured by the setting. Until at least mid-2018, this information was only revealed to new users

who first clicked on a link to see “More options” and then selected a second link to “Learn More”

about the Web & App Activity setting.

Fig. 2 (“Web & App Activity[:] Saves your searches, chrome browsing history and activity from
sites and apps that use Google services. This gives you better search results, suggestions and
personalization across Google services.”)

Second, Google failed to disclose the Web & App Activity setting to users when

they set up new devices using existing Google Accounts. A user’s Web & App Activity “enabled”

or “disabled” status applies to all devices signed in to the user’s Google Account. Thus, any time

a user signed any device in to an existing Google Account, Google could begin tracking that device

as long as Web & App Activity was enabled on the user’s Google Account. Because Android

14
 Filed under Seal

devices need to be signed in to Google to use critical functionalities and users sign in to Google at

device set-up, Google was able to track Android users via Web & App Activity as soon as they set

up new devices on their Google Accounts, without notifying those users.

Third, once consumers set up a Google Account or link new devices to their Google

Account, they were unlikely to discover the location tracking nature of Web & App Activity

settings. Google did not identify Web & App Activity as a location-related setting in the places

where a user would expect to find that information. For example, until around 2019, users who

explored location settings on their Android devices would not find Web & App Activity listed

among them. Likewise, a Google webpage titled “Manage your Android’s device location

settings” described Google’s location-based settings and discussed Location History without

mention of the Web & App Activity setting.

Google’s Privacy Policies also omitted mention of the Web & App Activity setting.

For instance, the December 18, 2017 version of Google’s Privacy Policy lists examples of

information about “your actual location” that Google “may collect and process.” These examples

specifically mention that “Location History allows Google to store a history of your location data,”

but makes no reference to the Web & App Activity setting.

Putting aside the placement of Google’s statements, many of Google’s affirmative

disclosures regarding Web & App Activity also failed to disclose that this setting authorized

Google to store and use location data. Google routinely described the Web & App Activity setting

as allowing the Company to store and use Google search history, Chrome web browser activity,

and activity on Google apps—without mention of location (unless the user clicked on link to a

pop-up window for more information).

In sum, Google misrepresented that disabling Location History stopped Google

from storing a user’s location and concealed that the Web & App Activity setting also stored

location data. This tended to mislead users to believe that the Web & App Activity setting did not

impact Google’s collection, storage, or use of location data; that the Location History setting alone

15
 Filed under Seal

controlled whether Google retained and used location data; and that disabling the Location History

setting would prevent Google from retaining and using the consumer’s locations on an ongoing

basis. Users could not avoid Google’s deceptive and unfair storage and use of their location

because it occurred without their knowledge.

These misrepresentations and omissions were material to Google users in the

District, as demonstrated by, among other things, users’ and Google’s response to the public

revelation in the 2018 AP article that Google “store[s] your location data even if you’ve used a

privacy setting that says it will prevent Google from doing so.”
Within Google, a self-titled “Oh Shit” meeting was convened the day the AP story

was published to begin brainstorming responses to the article. Soon after, Google CEO Sundar

Pichai and other senior executives became directly involved in crafting the Company’s response.

After the AP story, Google updated its help page to remove the misleading disclosure “With

Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored.”

The AP article set off a frenzy of negative press coverage. Google closely tracked

the public relations fall-out,

16
 Filed under Seal

In internal discussions, Google employees agreed that Google’s disclosures

regarding Location History were “definitely confusing” and that the user interface for Google

Account settings “feels like it is designed to make things possible, yet difficult enough that people

won’t figure it out.” One employee admitted, “I did not know Web and App Activity had anything

to do with location.”

Even before the AP article was published,

Yet Google did not act to clarify the

Web & App Activity and Location History settings until after the Company’s misconduct was

made public.
2. Google Misrepresents and Omits Material Facts Regarding Users’ Ability
to Control Their Privacy through Google Account Settings.

Google misleads users about its location tracking practices by misrepresenting the

extent to which Google Account settings control and prevent Google’s collection and use of

location data. Google offers simple “privacy controls” to attract users but continues to exploit

users’ location data regardless of their choices with respect to these settings.

Since at least 2014, Google has made misleading promises that users can control

the information that Google collects, stores, and uses about them by adjusting their Google

Account settings. In numerous iterations of Google’s Privacy Policies and other disclosures,
Google has pointed to Google Account settings as features that, for example, allow users to make

“meaningful choices about how [the information Google collects] is used;” “control the collection

of personal information;” “decide what types of data . . . [they] would like saved with [their]

account when [they] use Google services;” or “make it easier for [them] to see and control activity

that’s saved to [their] account and how it’s used.” See:

17
 Filed under Seal

Fig. 3 (“Control what you share with Google[:] It’s important to understand how your data (like
places you go and things you search for) helps Google deliver a more customized experience, so
you can choose the level of sharing that’s right for you. You can learn about what information
we use below, and you can change these settings anytime.”)
Since May 25, 2018, Google’s Privacy Policy has explained that “across our

services, you can adjust your privacy settings to control what we collect and how your information

is used.” In its Terms of Service and Privacy Policies, Google also represented that it would

“respect the choices you make to limit sharing or visibility settings in your Google Account.”

As part of setting-up a Google Account, Google expressly tells users, “You’re in

control. Depending on your account settings, some . . . data may be associated with your Google

Account and we treat this data as personal information. You can control how we collect and use

this data. . . .You can always adjust your controls later or withdraw your consent. . . .”
In another example, since 2019, Google has maintained a webpage devoted to

explaining “How Google uses location information.” This webpage states that “[i]f Web and App

Activity is enabled, your searches and activity from a number of other Google services are saved

to your Google Account. The activity saved to Web and App Activity may also include location

information. . .. Pausing Web & App Activity will stop saving your future searches and activity

from other Google services.”

18
 Filed under Seal

In statements like these, Google frames Google Account settings as tools that allow

a user to control the information Google collects and uses when a user interacts with Google

products, including location information. The Company’s reassuring statements about these

settings misleadingly imply that a user can stop Google from storing or deploying the user’s

location information by disabling these settings.

But this is not true. Regardless of whether the user has disabled Web & App

Activity or Location History, Google collects, stores, and uses location data when a user uses

certain Google products,

While touting users’

ability to control personal data collection through Google Account settings, Google flouts these

controls by continuing to collect, store, and use location data regardless of whether the user disable

these settings.
Google further misleads users by providing users only partial visibility into the

location data Google collects about them. For example, Google’s current Privacy Policy claims

that users can manage their privacy because they can “review and control information saved in

[their] Google Account,” “decide what types of activity [they would] like saved in [their] account,”

and “review and control data that’s created when [they] use Google services.” Earlier versions of

the Privacy Policy likewise indicate that Google provides “transparency and choice” options that

allow users to “access, manage, or delete information that is associated with [their] Google

Account,” and state that Google provides these tools in order to “be clear about what information

[it] collects.” In other disclosures, Google explains that the My Activity webpage “allows [users]

to review and control data that’s created when [they] use Google services” and that “My Activity

is a central place where [users] can view and manage [their] saved activity.”

19
 Filed under Seal

Users can delete this subset of location data, as well

as their Location History.

Despite claiming it endeavors to “be clear about what information [Google]

collects, so that [users] can make meaningful choices about how it is used,”

Until May 2018, Google did not disclose in its Privacy Policy that it stores

information from signed-out users. Even today, the webpage devoted to explaining “How Google

uses location information” only explains how location data is “saved in [a] Google Account,”

20
 Filed under Seal

Put simply, contrary to the Company’s representations, disabling or enabling

Google Account settings does not control whether Google will collect, store, or use a user’s

location data. Even disabling all Google Account settings is

not effective to prevent Google from storing and using a user’s location data. As a result of

Google’s misleading statements with respect to these settings, users cannot avoid Google’s access

to and use of their location data.

Google is aware that users do not understand Google Account settings or how these

settings interact with other location-related settings.

3. Google Misrepresented and Omitted Material Facts Regarding the Google

Ad Personalization Setting.

Google’s deceptive and unfair practices extend to the Company’s Google Ad

Personalization (GAP) setting. The GAP setting purports to allow users to opt out of personalized
advertising. Consistent with Google’s other practices, this setting allows users to “control” the

Company’s use of their location data only to an extent.

According to Google, the GAP setting will “[l]et Google use [a user’s Google

Account activity] to show [the user] more relevant ads on [Google’s] services and on websites and

apps that partner with [Google].” In explaining this setting, Google told users that they should “let

Google know [their] location,” so that “[they] won’t get ads for stores in other regions.”

Google’s disclosure misleads consumers to believe they can turn off the GAP

setting to prevent Google from using location data to show personalized ads. But this setting only

21
 Filed under Seal

provides an illusion of control. In reality, Google continues to target ads based on a user’s

location—both on and off Google products—even if the user opts out of ads personalization by

disabling the GAP setting.

D. Google Deceives Users Regarding Their Ability to Protect Their Privacy

Through Device Settings.

Google further misleads users into sharing location data through deceptive and

unfair practices that contradict users’ expectations regarding location-related device settings.

Specifically, Google misrepresents the ability of users to control or limit Google’s collection of

their location data through their device settings. Google misleads users and withholds material

facts about device settings in at least three respects.

First, Google tells users that they can control the flow of location data to Google

via the device’s location “master switch.” Google includes this “master switch” on Google-

licensed Android phones in order to provide this functionality. Furthermore, beginning with its

May 2018 Privacy Policy, Google represents that “the types of location data [Google] collect[s]

depend in part on [the user’s] device and account settings. For example, [a user] can turn [an]

Android device’s location on or off using the device’s setting app.” Google also provided Help

pages that explain: “If [a user] turn[s] off Location for [a] device, then no apps can use [the user’s]
device location.”
These representations, as well as the Android device setting itself, state and/or

imply that when users disable the master location setting, Google does not collect, store, or use the

user’s location to provide “services” (including ads) to the user. However, since at least 2014

through the present, Google has deceived users by failing to disclose that regardless of whether

the user explicitly forbids Google from accessing location via a device, Google derives and stores

the user’s location and

22
 Filed under Seal

Specifically, when a user turns the location “master switch” off, believing that they

are not sharing location information, Google nevertheless uses the user’s IP address

to infer the user’s location. Users have no

control over whether Google derives their location

Second, Google misleads users into believing that a user’s app-specific device

settings can control whether Google obtains their location data. Google includes these settings on

Android devices to allow a user to deny device location information to specific apps. Google Help

pages explain that on Android devices, a user can choose which apps can access and use a user’s

device location. But contrary to what Google leads users to expect, when a user has denied location

access to a Google app, Google deduces a user’s location

Third, device settings related to specific location signals on Android phones, such

as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, are confusing and conflicting, making it very challenging for users to limit

Google’s access to this data. For example, Google uses Wi-Fi scans to compute device location

more accurately and precisely. Android phones include a “Wi-Fi scanning” setting among other

location-related settings. However, even if a user toggles this setting “off,” Google can still obtain

Wi-Fi scans from the user’s device.

Simply put, even when a user’s mobile device is set to deny Google access to

location data, the Company finds a way to continue to ascertain the user’s location. Google’s

undisclosed practice of bypassing users’ location-related device settings constitutes a deceptive

and unfair practice. Because these practices are not clearly disclosed to users and contradict user

expectations, users cannot reasonably avoid Google’s access to and use of their location data.

23
 Filed under Seal

As one Google employee put it, “Real people just think in terms

of ‘location is on,’ ‘location is off’ because that’s exactly what you have on the front screen of

your phone.”
E. Google Uses Deceptive Practices that Undermine Users’ Ability to Make
Informed Choices About Their Data.

Google has relied on, and continues to rely on, deceptive and unfair practices that

make it difficult for users to decline location tracking or to evaluate the data collection and

processing to which they are purportedly consenting. Such practices are known in academic

literature as “dark patterns.” Dark patterns are deceptive design choices that alter the user’s

decision-making for the designer’s benefit and to the user’s detriment. Dark patterns take

advantage of behavioral tendencies to manipulate users into actions that are harmful to users or

contrary to their intent. Common examples of “dark patterns” include complicated navigation

menus, visual misdirection, confusing wording (such as double negatives), and repeated nudging.

Because location data is immensely valuable to the Company, Google makes

extensive use of dark patterns, including repeated nudging, misleading pressure tactics, and

evasive and deceptive descriptions of location features and settings, to cause users to provide more

and more location data (inadvertently or out of frustration).

1. Dark Patterns in Google Account Settings

Some of Google’s deceptive practices with respect to Google Account settings

already alleged above reflect the use of dark patterns. For example, Google’s decision to enable

the privacy-intrusive Web & App Activity feature by default, while failing to disclose this setting,

was a deceptive use of design. Through this dark pattern, Google not only misled users about the

extent of its location tracking, but also made it difficult for users to opt out of this tracking.

Google also uses dark patterns in “in-product” prompts to enable Google Account

settings—i.e., prompts to enable these settings when a user begins to use Google apps and services

24
 Filed under Seal

on a device. For example, for at least part of the relevant time period, Google told users that certain

Google products, such as Google Maps, Google Now, and Google Assistant “need[]” or “depend[]

on,” the Location History feature when setting up these products. See:

Fig 4 (“Get the most from Google Maps[:] Google needs to periodocally store your location to
improve route recommendations, search suggestions, and more.”)
However, these products could properly function without users agreeing to constant

tracking. For example, Maps and Google Now did not “need” Location History in order to perform

its basic functions and, in fact, both products would continue to function if the user later took a

series of actions to disable Location History. Because Google’s statements falsely implied that

users were not free to decline Google Account settings if they wished to use certain (often pre-

installed) Google products as they were intended, users were left with effectively no choice but to

enable these settings.

Google also designed the set-up process for certain Google products in a manner

that limited users’ ability to decide whether to permit Google to track them. In particular, Google

25
 Filed under Seal

prompted users to enable Location History and Web & App Activity, along with multiple other

settings, in order to use products like Google Assistant or Google Now. In other words, users could

only opt in or out of these settings collectively at set-up of the Google product. See:

Fig. 5 (“Give your new Assistant permission to help you[.] The Assistant depends on these
setting in order to work correctly. Turn these setting on for: . . . Web & App Activity[:] Includes
searches, Chrome history, and content you browse on the web and in apps[;] Location History[:]
Creates a private map of where you go with your signed-in devices.”)
By presenting users with an “all or nothing” opt-in, Google similarly denied users

the ability to choose which data-sharing features to enable, unless users took the additional and

burdensome action of trying to locate and disable these features after set-up.

Google also did not (and still does not) give users the choice to decline location

tracking once and for all. For example, if users decline to enable Location History or Web & App

Activity when first prompted in the set-up process for an Android device, Google continues to

26
 Filed under Seal

repeatedly prompt users to enable these settings when using Google products—despite already

refusing consent.

By repeatedly “nudging” users

to enable Google Account settings, Google increases the chances that a user will enable the setting

inadvertently or out of frustration. Google does not and has never provided similarly frequent

prompts to opt out of location sharing.

Further, until at least mid-2018, users who read Google’s prompts to enable Google

Account settings were provided only vague and imbalanced information about the consequences

of enabling Google Account settings, unless users clicked on links that led to further information.

These prompts misleadingly emphasized a few benefits that Location History provided to users—

such as commute notifications or more personalized search results—without providing a similar

emphasis and disclosure about the advertising and monetary benefits to Google. Indeed, Google

27
 Filed under Seal

only revealed that it used this comprehensive data for advertising purposes in separate linked or

drop-down disclosures that users would likely never see. See:

Fig. 6 (“Location History[:] Creates a private map of where you go with your sign-in devices[.]
Location History helps you get useful information such as commute predictions, improved
search results and more useful ads on and off Google.”)

At relevant times, users who paused Location History or deleted Location History

entries also received vague warnings implying that disabling or limiting Location History would

hinder the performance of Google apps. For example, users who disabled Location History were

28
 Filed under Seal

told that doing so “limits functionality of some Google products over time, such as Google Maps

and Google Now” and that “[n]one of your Google apps will be able to store location data in

Location History.” Users who deleted Location History entries were also warned that “Google

Now and other apps that use your Location History may stop working properly.” These warnings

were misleading because they failed to provide users with sufficient information to understand

what, if any, services would be limited, and falsely implied that Google products would not

function unless the user agreed to provide location data on a continuous basis.
2. Dark Patterns in Device Settings

Users who seek to limit Google’s location data collection through Android device

settings are also confronted with various dark patterns. For example, users may try to disable

location settings on their Android devices, such as through the location “master switch” or the app-

specific location permission settings. However, after disabling these settings, users are subject to

repeated prompting to re-enable location when using a Google app.

Once location is re-enabled on a user’s device, other Google apps and services can

access the user’s location, including (in some versions of the Android OS) when the user is not

interacting with the app. The only way to avoid such access is if the user remembers to disable

location again, a process which the user is discouraged to undertake because it requires a number

of steps and must be repeated every time a user wants to permit (and then deny) Google access to

their location.

During the relevant time period, Google also actively sought to increase the

percentage of users who enabled location settings on Android devices by providing vague

disclosures and making it more difficult for users to disable these settings. For example, in one

version of Android, Google offered a toggle that allowed users to disable location from a pull-

29
 Filed under Seal

down menu at the top of their screen. This made the setting more easily accessible to users.

However, Google removed this toggle from Android phones that Google manufactured,

Around the same time, Google also changed the dialogue box that users would see

when prompted by Google to enable location, so that more users would consent to report their

locations to Google. Pursuant to this change, users were no longer advised that they were agreeing

to persistent tracking of their precise location by Google, as shown below:

30
 Filed under Seal

Fig. 7 (Old Version – “Use location? This app wants to change your device setting: Use GPS,
Wi-Fi, and cell networks for location. Use Google’s location service, sending anonymous
location to Google even when no apps are running.” New Version – “For best results, let
your device turn on location, which uses Google’s location service.”)

Google took these actions because it has profound financial incentives to pressure

users into enabling location services and other location settings on their devices. Without these

settings enabled, Google has a substantially reduced ability to ascertain, extract, and monetize the

locations of its users.

31
 Filed under Seal

F. Google Engages in Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices in the District.

Google’s deceptive and unfair acts and practices alleged herein occurred in trade or

commerce in the District. Google offers, sells, provides, and advertises its devices, software

products, and services to District consumers. Consumers purchase Google’s products with the

deceptive settings in the District. Through its ad business, Google receives advertising revenue

based on the District consumer location data that it collects through the unfair and deceptive acts

and practices discussed herein.

CAUSES OF ACTION
Count One
Misrepresentations and Omissions in Violation of the Consumer Protection Procedures Act
The District re-alleges and incorporates the other allegations of this Complaint as

if set forth fully herein.

The CPPA is a remedial statute that is to be broadly construed. It establishes an

enforceable right to truthful information from merchants about consumer goods and services that

are or would be purchased, leased, or received in the District.

Google, in the ordinary course of business, offers, sells, and supplies consumer

goods and services and, therefore, is a merchant under the CPPA.

Google users receive consumer goods and services in the form of products and

services from Google and are therefore consumers under the CPPA.

The CPPA prohibits unfair and deceptive trade practices in connection with the

offer, sale, and supply of consumer goods and services.

By engaging in the acts and practices alleged herein, Google made or caused to be

made to District consumers, directly or indirectly, explicitly or by implication, misrepresentations

as to material facts which had a tendency to mislead consumers, in violation of D.C. Code § 28-

3904(e). Google’s misrepresentations include, but are not limited to, the following:

a. That consumers could prevent Google from retaining and using their location information

by disabling (i.e., turning off) the Location History setting;

32
 Filed under Seal

b. That consumers could prevent Google from retaining and using their location information

by adjusting Google Account settings;

c. That consumers could review and manage the location information associated with their

Google Account and/or retained by Google via the My Activities feature;

d. That consumers could prevent Google from using their location to target advertisements

by disabling the Google Ad Personalization setting;

e. That consumers could prevent Google from collecting, retaining, and using consumers’

location information by disabling location-related device settings; and

f. That consumers needed to enable Location History and/or Web and App Activity to use

certain Google products and services, including products and services pre-installed on

Android devices (such as Google Now, Google Assistant, and Google Maps).

By engaging in the acts and practices alleged herein, Google failed to state material

facts and/or used innuendo or ambiguity as to material facts, which had a tendency to mislead

District consumers, in violation of D.C. Code §§ 28-3904(f) and (f-1). Google failed to state and/or

used innuendo or ambiguity regarding at least the following facts:

a. That Google retained and used consumer’s location information even with the Location

History setting disabled;

b. That Google retained and used consumers’ location information through the Web & App

Activity setting, which was defaulted “on” at set up;

c. That consumers could not prevent Google from retaining and using consumers’ location

information by adjusting Google Account settings ;

d. That consumers could not prevent Google from using consumers’ location to target

advertisements by disabling the Google Ad Personalization setting;

e. That Google continues to collect and use consumers’ location information even when the

consumer’s “master” device location setting is disabled;

33
 Filed under Seal

f. That Google apps obtains a consumer’s location information from other sources available

to Google, even when consumers deny those

apps permission to access location data; and

g. That Google products and services, including products and services pre-installed on

Android devices (such as Google Now, Google Assistant, and Google Maps), could

function properly without Location History and/or Web and App Activity enabled.

Google’s unlawful acts and practices in violation of the CPPA targeted and affected

District residents.
Google’s violations present a continuing harm and the unlawful acts and practices

complained of here affect the public interest.

Google’s actions to date have failed to fully address the misleading and deceptive

nature of its business activities and the Company continues to engage in acts prohibited by CPPA.

Count Two
Unfair Trade Practices in Violation of the Consumer Protection Procedures Act
The State re-alleges and incorporates the other allegations of this Complaint as if

set forth fully herein.

The CPPA is a remedial statute that is to be broadly construed. It establishes an

enforceable right to truthful information from merchants about consumer goods and services that
are or would be purchased, leased, or received in the District.
The CPPA prohibits any person from engaging in unfair trade practices.

Google has engaged in unfair practices affecting District consumers, in violation of

D.C. Code § 28-3904, including by:

a. Misleading users regarding location-related settings and collecting, storing, and/or using

consumers’ location information without their knowledge and/or consent;

b. Conditioning or appearing to condition consumers’ use of Google products and services,

including products and services pre-installed on Android devices, on consumers’ consent

34
 Filed under Seal

to Google’s collection, storage, and/or use of their location data, where that consent and/or

data was not needed to provide the basic functionality of the product or service;

c. Employing user interfaces that make it difficult for consumers to deny Google access to

and use of their location information, including making location-related user controls

difficult to find and repeatedly prompting users who previously declined or disabled

location-related controls to enable those controls; and

d. Providing incomplete, imbalanced, or misleading information about the extent of Google’s

collection, storage, or use of consumers’ location data when a user enabled location-related

device settings or Google Account settings.

These practices harm consumers who wish to protect their sensitive location

information from disclosure to Google and Google’s advertising customers, by making it difficult

for consumers to deny Google access to their location information, regardless of whether that

information is needed to provide services to the consumer.

Google’s practices, including its use of dark patterns, causes or is likely to causes

substantial injury to consumers, including but not limited to subjecting consumers to pervasive

tracking of their location to which consumers did not consent and exposing consumers to targeted

advertising to which consumers did not consent.

These injuries are not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves, including

because Google’s misleading and conflicting settings and disclosures make it impossible for

consumers to understand when and to what extent they are being tracked. See infra ¶¶ 53, 62, 82,

93, 99, 101-103, 109-110.

The injuries are not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to

competition.

Google’s unlawful acts and practices in violation of the CPPA targeted and

affected District residents.

35
 Filed under Seal

Google’s violations present a continuing harm and the unlawful acts and practices

complained of here affect the public interest.

Google’s actions to date have failed to fully address the misleading and deceptive

nature of its business activities and the Company continues to engage in acts prohibited by the

CPPA.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the District respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against

Google and in favor of District as follows:

a. Permanently enjoining Google, pursuant to D.C. Code § 28-3909(a), from violating the

CPPA;

b. Order the disgorgement of monies, property, or data (including any algorithms developed

using such data) from Google based on its unlawful conduct and/or ordering Google to pay

damages and restitution;

c. Award civil penalties in an amount to be proven at trial and as authorized per violation of

the CPPA pursuant to D.C. Code § 28-3909(b);

d. Award the District the costs of this action and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to D.C.

Code § 28-3909(b); and

e. Granting such further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
JURY DEMAND
The District demands a trial by jury by the maximum number of jurors permitted by law.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: January 24, 2022

KARL A. RACINE
Attorney General for the District of Columbia

36
Filed under Seal

_/s/ Kathleen Konopka__________________

KATHLEEN KONOPKA
Deputy Attorney General
Public Advocacy Division

_/s/ Jimmy R. Rock_____________________

JIMMY R. ROCK [493521]
Acting Deputy Attorney General
Public Advocacy Division

_/s/ Benjamin M. Wiseman____ ___________

BENJAMIN M. WISEMAN [1005442]
Director, Office of Consumer Protection

_/s/ Jennifer M. Rimm ____ ___________

JENNIFER M. RIMM [1019209]
Assistant Attorney General
441 4th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
(202) 741-5226 (Phone)
(202) 741-8949 (Fax)
[email protected]
[email protected]

Attorneys for the District of Columbia

37
 Superior Court of the District of Columbia
CIVIL DIVISION- CIVIL ACTIONS BRANCH
INFORMATION SHEET
District of Columbia
________________________________________ Case Number: ____________________________________

vs January 24, 2022

Date: __________________________________________
Google LLC
________________________________________ One of the defendants is being sued
in their official capacity.
Name: (Please Print) Relationship to Lawsuit
Jennifer M. Rimm
x Attorney for Plaintiff
Firm Name:
Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia
Self (Pro Se)
Telephone No.: Six digit Unified Bar No.:
202-724-5191 1019209 Other: __________________
x
TYPE OF CASE: Non-Jury 6 Person Jury 12 Person Jury
Restitution and civil penalties Injunctive relief
Demand: $____________________________ Other: ___________________________________
PENDING CASE(S) RELATED TO THE ACTION BEING FILED
Case No.:______________________ Judge: __________________ Calendar #:_______________________

Case No.:______________________ Judge: ___________________ Calendar#:_______________________

NATURE OF SUIT: (Check One Box Only)

A. CONTRACTS COLLECTION CASES

01 Breach of Contract 14 Under $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent 16 Under $25,000 Consent Denied
02 Breach of Warranty 17 OVER $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent 18 OVER $25,000 Consent Denied
06 Negotiable Instrument 27 Insurance/Subrogation 26 Insurance/Subrogation
07 Personal Property Over $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent Over $25,000 Consent Denied
13 Employment Discrimination 07 Insurance/Subrogation 34 Insurance/Subrogation
15 Special Education Fees Under $25,000 Pltf. Grants Consent Under $25,000 Consent Denied
28 Motion to Confirm Arbitration
Award (Collection Cases Only)
B. PROPERTY TORTS

01 Automobile 03 Destruction of Private Property 05 Trespass

02 Conversion 04 Property Damage
07 Shoplifting, D.C. Code § 27-102 (a)

C. PERSONAL TORTS

01 Abuse of Process 10 Invasion of Privacy 17 Personal Injury- (Not Automobile,

02 Alienation of Affection 11 Libel and Slander Not Malpractice)
03 Assault and Battery 12 Malicious Interference 18Wrongful Death (Not Malpractice)
04 Automobile- Personal Injury 13 Malicious Prosecution 16 19 Wrongful Eviction
x 05 Deceit (Misrepresentation) 14 Malpractice Legal 20 Friendly Suit
06 False Accusation 15 Malpractice Medical (Including Wrongful Death) 21 Asbestos
07 False Arrest 16 Negligence- (Not Automobile, 22 Toxic/Mass Torts
08 Fraud Not Malpractice) 23 Tobacco
24 Lead Paint
SEE REVERSE SIDE AND CHECK HERE IF USED

CV-496/June 2015
 Information Sheet, Continued

C. OTHERS
01 Accounting 17 Merit Personnel Act (OEA)
02 Att. Before Judgment (D.C. Code Title 1, Chapter 6)
05 Ejectment 18 Product Liability
09 Special Writ/Warrants
(DC Code § 11-941) 24 Application to Confirm, Modify,
10 Traffic Adjudication Vacate Arbitration Award (DC Code § 16-4401)
11 Writ of Replevin 29 Merit Personnel Act (OHR)
12 Enforce Mechanics Lien 31 Housing Code Regulations
16 Declaratory Judgment 32 Qui Tam
33 Whistleblower

II.
03 Change of Name 15 Libel of Information 21 Petition for Subpoena
06 Foreign Judgment/Domestic 19 Enter Administrative Order as [Rule 28-I (b)]
08 Foreign Judgment/International Judgment [ D.C. Code § 22 Release Mechanics Lien
13 Correction of Birth Certificate 2-1802.03 (h) or 32-151 9 (a)] 23 Rule 27(a)(1)
14 Correction of Marriage 20 Master Meter (D.C. Code § (Perpetuate Testimony)
Certificate 42-3301, et seq.) 24 Petition for Structured Settlement
26 Petition for Civil Asset Forfeiture (Vehicle) 25 Petition for Liquidation
27 Petition for Civil Asset Forfeiture (Currency)
28 Petition for Civil Asset Forfeiture (Other)

D. REAL PROPERTY

09 Real Property-Real Estate 08 Quiet Title

12 Specific Performance 25 Liens: Tax / Water Consent Granted
04 Condemnation (Eminent Domain) 30 Liens: Tax / Water Consent Denied
10 Mortgage Foreclosure/Judicial Sale 31 Tax Lien Bid Off Certificate Consent Granted
11 Petition for Civil Asset Forfeiture (RP)

January 24, 2022

__________________________________ ______________________________
Attorney’s Signature Date

CV-496/ June 2015

 Superior Court of the District of Columbia
CIVIL DIVISION
Civil Actions Branch
500 Indiana Avenue, N.W.,D.C.
Washington, Suite 5000Telephone:
20001 Washington, D.C. 20001
879-1133
Telephone: (202) 879-1133 Website: www.dccourts.gov

District of Columbia
Plaintiff
vs.
Case Number
Google LLC
Defendant

SUMMONS
To the above named Defendant:

You are hereby summoned and required to serve an Answer to the attached Complaint, either
personally or through an attorney, within twenty one (21) days after service of this summons upon you,
exclusive of the day of service. If you are being sued as an officer or agency of the United States Government
or the District of Columbia Government, you have sixty (60) days after service of this summons to serve your
Answer. A copy of the Answer must be mailed to the attorney for the plaintiff who is suing you. The
attorney’s name and address appear below. If plaintiff has no attorney, a copy of the Answer must be mailed
to the plaintiff at the address stated on this Summons.

You are
Your arealso
alsorequired
requiredto
to file
file the
the original
original Answer
Answer with
with the
the Court
Court in Suite 5000 at 500 Indiana Avenue,
N.W., between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Mondays through Fridays or between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon on
Saturdays. You may file the original Answer with the Court either before you serve a copy of the Answer on
the plaintiff
plaintiff or
orwithin
withinfive
seven (7) days
(5) days after after you served
you have have served the plaintiff.
the plaintiff. If you
If you fail failantoAnswer,
to file file an judgment
Answer,
judgment
by defaultby default
may may be
be entered entered
against youagainst
for theyou for demanded
relief the relief demanded in the complaint.
in the complaint.

Jennifer M. Rimm Clerk of the Court

Name of Plaintiff’s Attorney
Office of Attorney General for the District of Columbia
By
Address Deputy Clerk
400 6th St. NW, 10th Fl. Washington DC 20001

202-724-5191 Date
Telephone
如需翻译,请打电话 (202) 879-4828 Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction Để có một bài dịch, hãy gọi (202) 879-4828
번역을 원하시면, (202) 879-4828 로 전화주십시요 የአማርኛ ትርጉም ለማግኘት (202) 879-4828 ይደውሉ

IMPORTANT: IF YOU FAIL TO FILE AN ANSWER WITHIN THE TIME STATED ABOVE, OR IF, AFTER YOU
ANSWER, YOU FAIL TO APPEAR AT ANY TIME THE COURT NOTIFIES YOU TO DO SO, A JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT
MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU FOR THE MONEY DAMAGES OR OTHER RELIEF DEMANDED IN THE
COMPLAINT. IF THIS OCCURS, YOUR WAGES MAY BE ATTACHED OR WITHHELD OR PERSONAL PROPERTY OR
REAL ESTATE YOU OWN MAY BE TAKEN AND SOLD TO PAY THE JUDGMENT. IF YOU INTEND TO OPPOSE THIS
ACTION, DO NOT FAIL TO ANSWER WITHIN THE
WITH THE REQUIRED
REQUIRED TIME.
TIME.

If you wish to talk to a lawyer and feel that you cannot afford to pay a fee to a lawyer, promptly contact one of the offices of the
Legal Aid Society (202-628-1161) or the Neighborhood Legal Services (202-279-5100) for help or come to Suite 5000 at 500
Indiana Avenue, N.W., for more information concerning places where you may ask for such help.

See reverse side for Spanish translation

Vea al dorso la traducción al español

CV-3110 [Rev. June 2017] Super. Ct. Civ. R. 4

 TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR DEL DISTRITO DE COLUMBIA
DIVISIÓN CIVIL
Sección de Acciones Civiles
500 Indiana Avenue, N.W., Suite 5000, Washington, D.C. 20001
Washington,
Teléfono: DC 20001
(202) 879-1133 Teléfono
Sitio 879-1133
web: www.dccourts.gov

District of Columbia
Demandante
contra
Número de Caso:
Google LLC
Demandado

CITATORIO
Al susodicho Demandado:
Por la presente se le cita a comparecer y se le require entregar una Contestación a la Demanda adjunta, sea en
persona o por medio de un abogado, en el plazo de veintiún (21) días contados después que usted haya recibido este
citatorio, excluyendo el día mismo de la entrega del citatorio. Si usted está siendo demandado en calidad de oficial o
agente del Gobierno de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica o del Gobierno del Distrito de Columbia, tiene usted
sesenta (60) días, contados después que usted haya recibido este citatorio, para entregar su Contestación. Tiene que
enviarle por correo una copia de su Contestación al abogado de la parte demandante. El nombre y dirección del
abogado aparecen al final de este documento. Si el demandado no tiene abogado, tiene que enviarle al demandante una
copia de la Contestación por correo a la dirección que aparece en este Citatorio.

A usted también se le require presentar la Contestación original al Tribunal en la Oficina 5000, sito en 500
Indiana Avenue, N.W., entre las 8:30 a.m. y 5:00 p.m., de lunes a viernes o entre las 9:00 a.m. y las 12:00 del mediodía
los sábados. Usted puede presentar la Contestación original ante el Juez ya sea antes que usted le entregue al
demandante una copia de la Contestación o en el plazo de siete (7) días de haberle hecho la entrega al demandante. Si
usted incumple con presentar una Contestación, podría dictarse un fallo en rebeldía contra usted para que se haga
efectivo el desagravio que se busca en la demanda.
Jennifer M. Rimm SECRETARIO DEL TRIBUNAL
Nombre del abogado del Demandante

Office of Attorney General for the District of Columbia Por:

Dirección Subsecretario
400 6th St. NW, 10th Fl. Washington DC 20001

202-724-5191 Fecha
Teléfono
如需翻译,请打电话 (202) 879-4828 Veuillez appeler au (202) 879-4828 pour une traduction Để có một bài dịch, hãy gọi (202) 879-4828
번역을 원하시면, (202) 879-4828 로 전화주십시요 የአማርኛ ትርጉም ለማግኘት (202) 879-4828 ይደውሉ

IMPORTANTE: SI USTED INCUMPLE CON PRESENTAR UNA CONTESTACIÓN EN EL PLAZO ANTES

MENCIONADO O, SI LUEGO DE CONTESTAR, USTED NO COMPARECE CUANDO LE AVISE EL JUZGADO, PODRÍA
DICTARSE UN FALLO EN REBELDÍA CONTRA USTED PARA QUE SE LE COBRE LOS DAÑOS Y PERJUICIOS U OTRO
DESAGRAVIO QUE SE BUSQUE EN LA DEMANDA. SI ESTO OCURRE, PODRÍA RETENÉRSELE SUS INGRESOS, O
PODRÍA TOMÁRSELE SUS BIENES PERSONALES O BIENES RAÍCES Y SER VENDIDOS PARA PAGAR EL FALLO. SI
USTED PRETENDE OPONERSE A ESTA ACCIÓN, NO DEJE DE CONTESTAR LA DEMANDA DENTRO DEL PLAZO
EXIGIDO.

Si desea conversar con un abogado y le parece que no puede pagarle a uno, llame pronto a una de nuestras oficinas del Legal Aid
Society (202-628-1161) o el Neighborhood Legal Services (202-279-5100) para pedir ayuda o venga a la Oficina 5000 del 500
Indiana Avenue, N.W., para informarse sobre otros lugares donde puede pedir ayuda al respecto.

Vea al dorso el original en inglés

See reverse side for English original
CV-3110 [Rev. June 2017] Super. Ct. Civ. R. 4