Hilton, LinkedIn, PNC Bank, Wells Fargo face class actions over alleged pixel tracking, privacy violations

Pixel tracking class action lawsuits overview:

• Who: Consumers filed class action lawsuits against Hilton, LinkedIn, PNC Bank and Wells Fargo.
• Why: Plaintiffs allege the companies used pixel tracking and similar technologies to intercept users’ online communications without consent.
• Where: The class action lawsuits were filed in federal courts in California.

Four companies — Hilton, LinkedIn, PNC Bank and Wells Fargo — are facing class action lawsuits alleging they secretly tracked users’ online activity through pixel trackers and other hidden technologies.

According to the complaints, the companies embedded third-party tracking tools on their websites that allegedly intercepted users’ communications in real time and transmitted that data to outside companies for advertising and profiling purposes.

The class action lawsuits claim this tracking occurred automatically during page loads, capturing information such as page URLs, search activity and persistent identifiers without users’ knowledge or consent.

Plaintiffs argue the alleged conduct violates the California Invasion of Privacy Act and the Federal Wiretap Act, which prohibit the unauthorized interception of electronic communications.

Hilton class action alleges third-party trackers intercepted browsing data

Plaintiff Gadeer Erakat claims Hilton embedded tracking tools operated by third parties that allegedly intercepted users’ browsing activity, including page URLs and search behavior, and transmitted that information during the page-load process.

The complaint alleges these trackers enabled identity resolution and cross-session profiling for targeted advertising purposes without user consent.

Erakat further claims Hilton did not provide a consent banner or otherwise notify users before deploying the tracking technologies.

LinkedIn class action targets browser scanning and fingerprinting

A separate class action lawsuit against LinkedIn alleges the company used hidden scripts to scan users’ browsers for installed extensions and transmit that data to third parties.

According to plaintiff Nicholas Farrell’s complaint, this tracking could reveal sensitive personal information, including political views, religious beliefs and employment status, all tied to users’ real identities.

The class action lawsuit claims the tracking occurred silently each time users loaded a page and was not disclosed in LinkedIn’s privacy policy.

PNC Bank sued over pixel tracking on financial pages

PNC Bank is accused of embedding pixel trackers, including tools operated by Pinterest, LinkedIn and X, that allegedly captured users’ browsing activity on personal finance pages.

Plaintiff Shahd Erakat claims these trackers transmitted full URLs and persistent identifiers to third parties, allowing them to build advertising profiles based on users’ financial interests.

Erakat says this tracking occurred in real time without any consent mechanism in place.

Wells Fargo class action claims Google and Adobe trackers intercepted data

Wells Fargo faces similar allegations that it used tracking technologies operated by Google, Adobe and others to monitor user activity on its website.

According to the class action lawsuit, also filed by Shahd Erakat, these trackers allegedly transmitted detailed browsing data — including visits to debt-related pages — along with persistent identifiers that enabled cross-session tracking.

Erakat claims the tracking occurred automatically during page loads and without user authorization.

Lawsuits center on consent and real-time interception

Across all four cases, plaintiffs argue the companies used pixel tracking technologies to intercept communications as they occurred, rather than merely collecting data after the fact.

The complaints emphasize that users were not informed or given the opportunity to consent before their data was allegedly shared with third parties for advertising and monetization purposes.

The plaintiffs are seeking damages, statutory penalties and injunctive relief to stop the alleged tracking practices.

Earlier this year, Northwell Health agreed to a class action settlement to resolve allegations it disclosed patient information to third parties without consent.

What do you think about these pixel tracking class action lawsuits? Let us know in the comments.

Shahd and Gadeer Erakat are represented by Reuben D. Nathan of Nathan & Associates APC and Ross Cornell of Law Offices of Ross Cornell APC. Farrell is represented by Scott R. Drury of Drury Legal LLC and Joshua D. Arisohn of Arisohn LLC. 

The pixel tracking class action lawsuits are Erakat v. Wells Fargo & Co., Case 2:26-cv-01353-DAD-CSK, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California; Erakat v. PNC Bank, National Association, Case 2:26-at-00581, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California; Erakat v. Hilton Domestic Operating Co. Inc., Case 2:26-cv-01387-DC-CSK, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California; and Farrell v. LinkedIn Corp., Case 4:26-cv-02953, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Natori class action claims misleading email subject lines about sale deadlines
• Wawa recalls milk products due to potential plastic contamination
• Wayfair sued in class action over ’30-day returns’ policy on non-returnable items
• Amazon Fire TV Stick class action alleges devices ‘bricked’ after software support ended