Google will have to face a class action lawsuit that accuses it of collecting users’ data through Chrome without their consent. In a decision on Tuesday, a federal appeals court reversed a December 2022 ruling that dismissed the case, saying the lower court should’ve reviewed Google’s disclosures and determined “whether a reasonable user reading them would think that he or she was consenting to the data collection.”

The class action lawsuit, first filed in 2020, alleged that Google collected data from Chrome users — regardless of whether they enabled Chrome sync. This feature saves bookmarks, passwords, open tabs, and other data to your Google account, giving you easy access to this information when signed into Chrome on multiple devices.

The plaintiffs claimed Chrome “intentionally and unlawfully” sent Google browsing history, IP addresses, persistent cookie identifiers, and unique browser identifiers without their explicit permission. At the time, Google argued users consented to this by accepting the company’s privacy policy. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers agreed, stating in her order granting dismissal that “Google adequately disclosed, and plaintiffs consented to, the collection of the at-issue data.”

However, Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. writes in today’s decision that Judge Gonzalez Rogers didn’t take into account whether users actually understood this agreement. “Google had a general privacy disclosure yet promoted Chrome by suggesting that certain information would not be sent to Google unless a user turned on sync,” Smith writes. The case will be returned to the lower courts for reconsideration.

“We disagree with this ruling and are confident the facts of the case are on our side. Chrome Sync helps people use Chrome seamlessly across their different devices and has clear privacy controls,” Google spokesperson José Castañeda says in a statement to The Verge. And while Google will soon no longer require users to enable Chrome sync to access saved information, Castañeda says, “This announcement is not related to the litigation.”