• by Wendy Davis , July 20, 2026

A group of web users based in the United Kingdom have appealed an order dismissing their class-action complaint against PayPal's Honey, a browser extension that offers downloadable coupons.

Among other claims, the users contended that Honey violated their privacy by tracking web-browsing activity.

U.S. District Court Judge P. Casey Pitts in the Northern District of California threw out the complaint last month, ruling that the browser's express purpose was to send coupons to users based on their browsing data.

"Given that the very purpose of the extension plaintiffs downloaded was to track their browsing, the conduct alleged here involved the kind of 'routine commercial behavior' that does not constitute 'a highly offensive intrusion of privacy,'" Pitts wrote in an order dismissing the case with prejudice.

Last week, the plaintiffs filed papers appealing that order with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Honey users have not yet made substantive arguments to that court.

Pitts' ruling came in a lawsuit brought last year by Tom Campbell and six other United Kingdom residents. They initially alleged that Honey failed to seek out the "best" possible coupons, and instead offered discount codes from it received from affiliates or other sources.

Pitts dismissed those complaints, but allowed the plaintiffs to revise their allegations and bring them again.

In January, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint that included the earlier allegations as well as new privacy allegations -- including that the browser extension "examines what websites the Honey user has visited and what cookies exist on the user’s browser."

Pitts said in his dismissal order that the plaintiffs "fail to allege anything about what was tracked by Honey, let alone what behavior was specifically tracked."

"The collection of browsing data, without more detail on why collecting that data could be intrusive, does not involve conduct that can be deemed 'highly offensive' for the purposes of an invasion of privacy claim," he wrote.

He also essentially said allegations that Honey's coupons were not the "best," even if proven true, wouldn't support the plaintiffs' bid for either monetary compensation or an injunction.

The plaintiffs are expected to make substantive arguments to the 9th Circuit by October 5.