
California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a $6 million settlement with Chrome Holding Co., the successor to 23andMe, on Oct. 19, 2026. The deal, filed in a Missouri bankruptcy court, resolves state claims that the company failed to protect customers’ genetic information after a 2023 breach affecting nearly 7 million people, including over 855,000 Californians.
The state sued the company in California court, alleging that its security practices were unreasonable and that it misled customers about data safety. A parallel objection was raised in the bankruptcy case when 23andMe tried to sell customers’ genetic data and samples without the explicit consent required by California’s Genetic Information Privacy Act. Both the bankruptcy and district courts denied the objection, prompting the settlement.
Source: California Attorney General
The $6 million payment resolves the pending claims, but the most important outcome for Californians is the reaffirmation of their right to request deletion of their genetic data and destruction of their samples. The settlement does not change the fact that the data was already sold, but it gives consumers a clear path to have their information removed.
Consumers can follow these steps on the 23andMe website:
To destroy a stored saliva sample, adjust the preference under “Preferences” in your account settings. To revoke research consent, use the “Research and Product Consents” section.
If you have trouble deleting your data, receive a confusing notice, or suspect further misuse of your genetic information, consulting a consumer‑privacy attorney can help you protect your rights and ensure the company follows California law.
The settlement shows California will actively enforce its privacy statutes, which may deter other companies from ignoring data‑security duties.
Californians now have a clear, court‑backed process to erase their genetic information, giving them more control over personal data.
Although deletion is possible, the earlier sale of data without consent may still expose consumers to privacy risks.
Courts may face more challenges when companies try to sell personal data in bankruptcy without explicit consent.
Log in and follow the step‑by‑step guide to delete your data or destroy your sample if you’re a former customer.
This article is general information based on California Attorney General and court or agency records available at publication time. It is not legal advice; laws and deadlines differ by state and by case. Published October 19, 2026.
Source: California Attorney General
A federal judge declined to halt court proceedings while Google, Meta, and TikTok appeal a ruling upholding California's social media addiction law.
Five California residents filed a class action lawsuit accusing PG&E and PolyAI of violating state privacy laws by routing calls through an AI assistant.
Fidelity Digital Asset Services agreed to pay $500,000 to resolve California allegations that it barred users from withdrawing cryptocurrency during its first two years.
California and a bipartisan group of state attorneys general filed a notice in Character.AI's bankruptcy, urging the court to address privacy and child‑safety concerns before any sale of the company's assets.
A federal judge heard arguments over whether Google's AI customer service tool illegally records phone calls without proper consumer consent.
Reading about the law is one thing, applying it to your own case is another. Browse verified attorneys in California by practice area.