Follow us on Google News
A US federal judge has allowed Facebook users to pursue a class action lawsuit against Meta over allegations that the company collected sensitive patient information through tracking tools installed on healthcare websites. The lawsuit alleges that Meta received data from at least 664 hospital systems and healthcare provider websites without users’ knowledge or consent.
US District Judge William Orrick of the Northern District of California granted a motion allowing multiple Facebook users to pursue their claims collectively. The case concerns alleged violations of state and federal consumer protection laws involving Meta’s tracking technology, including Meta Pixel.
The information allegedly collected includes details about patients’ medical conditions, treatments, doctors and prescription medications. Meta has denied wrongdoing, maintaining that healthcare providers and website operators are responsible for configuring its tracking tools.
FCRF’s Chief AI Officer Certification Returns on November 14 to Prepare Future AI Leaders
How Did Meta Allegedly Collect Patient Health Information?
The allegations centre on Meta Pixel, a tracking tool embedded in websites and applications to monitor user activity and measure advertising performance.
According to the plaintiffs, the technology enabled Meta to receive sensitive information when individuals interacted with healthcare websites and online services.
Cohen Milstein, the interim co-lead counsel representing the plaintiffs, identified at least 664 hospital systems and healthcare provider websites from which Meta allegedly received patient information.
The lawsuit covers several categories of alleged data collection, including users who clicked buttons or links on healthcare websites and those whose medical conditions, treatments or doctors’ names were transmitted.
Other claims concern information about prescription medications and alleged intrusions involving users’ devices when they accessed healthcare-related websites or applications.
The plaintiffs maintain that the information was collected without their knowledge or consent, raising questions about the handling of sensitive medical data by online tracking technologies.
Meta Denies Allegations, Points to Healthcare Website Operators
Meta has rejected the allegations and argued that healthcare providers and website operators control how its tracking technologies are implemented.
The company maintains that developers using its business tools must have the necessary rights to share information and are prohibited from transmitting sensitive data under its terms.
Meta also opposed treating the claims as a single class action, arguing that the allegations involve different healthcare providers and websites with varying implementations of its tracking technology.
According to the company, those differences require individual consideration rather than a consolidated legal proceeding.
The dispute centres on whether Meta can be held responsible for allegedly receiving sensitive patient information through tracking tools deployed by third-party healthcare organisations.
Federal Judge Permits Facebook Users to Pursue Collective Claims
Judge Orrick rejected Meta’s objections to class certification and permitted the plaintiffs to pursue their claims collectively.
The ruling allows Facebook users whose information was allegedly collected through healthcare websites to proceed under the certified classes.
These include claims involving interactions with healthcare website buttons and links, medical conditions and treatments, prescription drug information, and alleged device intrusions.
The decision concerns whether the claims can proceed together and does not establish that Meta violated privacy or consumer protection laws.
The lawsuit will now proceed with the plaintiffs’ allegations and Meta’s denials remaining subject to further judicial examination.
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
