The $20 Billion AI Black Box and the Data You Thought Was Private

Key quote:

“Because no Defendant in this matter has served on Plaintiff either an answer or a motion for summary judgment as of the filing of this Notice, Plaintiff may dismiss this matter without prejudice as a matter of right.”

Why it matters: I was tracking Case 3:26-cv-02803 because it potentially exposed an uncomfortable economic reality: when you chat with Perplexity about your taxes or health, that data might not just be sitting in a silo. It was allegedly flowing to Meta and Google via “undetectable” trackers, even in Incognito mode, to fuel ad targeting and AI training. The plaintiff, David Noel, filed a 135-page complaint in March 2026 detailing how a $20 billion valuation company might be monetizing our most vulnerable moments. The sudden voluntary dismissal on May 1, 2026, feels less like a defeat and more like a tactical pause. With courts recently rejecting similar claims because data wasn’t technically “in transit”, Noel’s team likely needs to reframe the argument around the “mere capability” theory established in Ambriz v. Google (another case I’m tracking). Until that refiling happens, we are left guessing if our private prompts are being used for better targeted advertising.