The Stripe lawsuit landscape in 2026 spans several fronts at once: an ongoing consumer privacy class action in federal court in California, a new patent infringement case in Delaware, a growing pile of merchant complaints over frozen funds, a Federal Trade Commission warning letter about debanking, and a resolved cryptocurrency fraud settlement with the Massachusetts Attorney General. Stripe, Inc., the payments company based in South San Francisco, is not facing any single bet-the-company case, but the volume and variety of claims against it have grown significantly as the company has pushed into new areas like stablecoins and trust banking.
Here is what each of the active and recent matters involves.
The Privacy Class Action Over Shopper Data
The most significant ongoing case is Silver v. Stripe Inc., No. 4:20-CV-08196-YGR, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The putative class alleges Stripe collected personal information, including purchase data, from visitors to its merchant partners’ websites and shared that information with other merchants and third parties.1Bloomberg Law. Stripe Must Face Consumer Privacy Claims Over Data on Purchases The complaint cites the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the Florida Security of Communications Act, and Washington’s wiretap law.
On July 28, 2021, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers partially granted and partially denied Stripe’s motion to dismiss. The wiretap claims were thrown out; the court found Stripe’s privacy policy, surfaced through merchants’ sign-in wrap agreements, was enough to establish consent for the data collection itself.2Inside Privacy. California Federal Court Examines Consent, Wiretap Claims and Privacy Laws on Motion to Dismiss But claims under the California Constitution’s privacy protections, common law invasion of privacy, and the “unfair” prong of California’s Unfair Competition Law survived. The judge said she could not decide at the pleading stage whether consumers had actually consented to Stripe sharing their data with additional third parties.1Bloomberg Law. Stripe Must Face Consumer Privacy Claims Over Data on Purchases Stripe says its data collection is for fraud prevention, not advertising.
A related case, Lockhart v. Crumbl, LLC, No. 4:24-cv-02607 (N.D. Cal.), was filed May 1, 2024. The plaintiff sued the cookie retailer, not Stripe directly, alleging Crumbl embedded Stripe’s web-tracking technology on its site to capture names, addresses, payment information, keystrokes, mouse movements, and clicks without consent, and that the tracking code persisted after checkout to collect data as consumers browsed other sites.3Bloomberg Law. Crumbl Cookies Sued Over Info Sharing With Payments Processor4Data Privacy and Security Insider. Crumbl Sued for Disclosing Data to Stripe Without Consent The complaint frames Crumbl as having aided and conspired with Stripe to violate the California Invasion of Privacy Act.5ClassAction.org. Lockhart v Crumbl, LLC Complaint The case is pending before Judge Vince Chhabria with no substantive rulings on the merits as of mid-2026.6PACER Monitor. Lockhart v Crumbl, LLC
Patent Cases
Stripe’s biggest patent fight is over. In Boom! Payments, Inc. v. Stripe, Inc., No. 2020-1274, the patent holder had accused Stripe and Shopify of infringing three patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 8,429,084; 9,235,857; and 10,346,840) covering systems for confirming an online transaction before releasing payment through an intermediary.7FindLaw. Boom! Payments, Inc. v. Stripe, Inc. On January 13, 2021, the Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal, holding under the Alice framework that the patents claimed only the abstract idea of payment escrow and that moving information between computers to carry out that function was not a technological improvement.8Bloomberg Law. Stripe Wins Appeal Invalidating Boom Payments Patents All three patents were declared ineligible under 35 U.S.C. ยง 101.
A newer suit is still in its early stages. Autoscribe Corporation v. Stripe, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-01498, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware on December 12, 2025. Autoscribe asserts U.S. Patent Nos. 11,620,621 and 12,462,234; public filings have not detailed the specific technology beyond general patent infringement allegations.9CourtListener. Autoscribe Corporation v. Stripe, Inc. Autoscribe filed an amended complaint in April 2026, and Stripe answered with a counterclaim in June 2026. The case remains active.
The Massachusetts PlexCoin Settlement
In September 2020, Stripe settled with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office over its role processing payments for PlexCoin, a fraudulent cryptocurrency offering. The AG alleged Stripe’s risk monitoring and fraud prevention were inadequate and let PlexCorp’s leadership use the platform to defraud thousands of investors, including at least 22 in Massachusetts, between August and September 2017.10Massachusetts Attorney General. Payment Processor to Pay $120,000 in Connection With Cryptocurrency Scheme The PlexCoin offering raised roughly $15 million before being shut down.11CoinDesk. Stripe to Pay $120,000 in PlexCoin ICO Settlement With Massachusetts Attorney General
Stripe terminated the PlexCoin accounts in September 2017, but the AG concluded it should have acted sooner. In a filing dated September 16, 2020, Stripe agreed to pay $120,000, add enhanced security protocols, train employees on risk monitoring and fraud prevention, and cooperate with ongoing investigations. In return, the AG agreed not to pursue civil action.10Massachusetts Attorney General. Payment Processor to Pay $120,000 in Connection With Cryptocurrency Scheme
The FTC Debanking Warning Letter
On March 26, 2026, FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson sent formal warning letters to the CEOs of Stripe, PayPal, Visa, and Mastercard, cautioning that denying consumers access to financial services based on political or religious views could violate Section 5 of the FTC Act’s prohibition on unfair or deceptive practices.12FTC. FTC Chairman Issues Warning Letters to CEOs of PayPal, Stripe, Visa, Mastercard About Debanking American Consumers The letters pointed to President Trump’s August 7, 2025, Executive Order on debanking.
The letter to CEO Patrick Collison cited Stripe’s own terms of service stating that Stripe “does not discriminate based on political affiliation or viewpoints,” and suggested any deviation from that representation could be deceptive.13FTC. Stripe Debanking Warning Letter It referenced media reports about Stripe suspending payment processing for the Trump presidential campaign after January 6, 2021, and cutting off a small business selling gun accessories. A Stripe spokesperson denied the allegations: “At Stripe, we do not restrict access to our services based on political viewpoints or affiliation.”14Banking Dive. FTC Threatens Enforcement Action Over Debanking No formal FTC enforcement action has followed the warning as of mid-2026.
Merchant Complaints Over Frozen Funds
Most of the people searching for information on suing Stripe are merchants whose accounts were suspended or whose balances are being held. The Better Business Bureau has logged 1,727 complaints against Stripe over a recent three-year period, 692 of them in the most recent 12 months. They sort into billing issues (575), product issues (563), and service or repair issues (322). The BBB says the complaints predominantly concern “release of funds and account suspension and/or termination of accounts,” with merchants reporting that Stripe held balances indefinitely without specific reasons, sometimes for more than two years.15BBB. Stripe, Inc. BBB Complaints
What those merchants can actually do is shaped by Stripe’s Services Agreement, which requires individual binding arbitration through the American Arbitration Association and contains a class action waiver. The agreement caps Stripe’s total liability at the fees the merchant paid during the 12 months before the disputed event, and requires a written notice of dispute before arbitration can begin.16Stripe. Stripe Services Agreement Consumers are subject to a similar arbitration regime and must opt out within 30 days of accepting Stripe’s terms if they want to keep the right to sue in court.17Stripe. Stripe Consumer Arbitration Agreement
One prominent frozen-funds fight has played out in bankruptcy court. Stripe terminated services to the nonprofit donation platform Flipcause on December 4, 2025, and froze the account, citing regulatory compliance concerns and Mastercard warning letters. Flipcause filed for Chapter 11 in Delaware, and its bankruptcy counsel moved to compel Stripe to release about $790,000 of the roughly $1.45 million Stripe was holding. Stripe opposed, pointing to potential exposure of up to $6 million in chargebacks and fines. A hearing on the objection was set for February 2026.18Oakland Voices. Stripe Terminated Services, Flipcause Bankruptcy Filings Reveal
A separate federal class action, Riles v. Stripe, Inc., No. 3:25-cv-09120 (N.D. Cal.), was filed in 2025. It alleges fraud, conversion, and violations of federal business-practices laws in how Stripe handles customer funds. In an unrelated FTC receivership against Empire Holdings Group LLC (behind Storefunnels), a court-appointed receiver alleged in a May 2025 motion that Stripe violated an asset-freeze order by processing an improper withdrawal and failed to transfer about $39,720 to the estate, and sought court-ordered compliance and possible sanctions.19NCRC. NCRC Comment in Opposition to Stripe Inc’s National Trust Charter Application
Opposition to Stripe’s Trust Bank Charter
Not a lawsuit, but worth mentioning because it draws on the same enforcement history: Stripe, through its subsidiary Bridge Ventures LLC, applied to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for a national trust bank charter under the name Bridge National Trust Bank, N.A., tied to its over-$1 billion acquisition of the stablecoin infrastructure firm Bridge Network. The OCC granted preliminary conditional approval on February 12, 2026.20OCC. Bridge National Trust Bank Corporate Decision
The National Community Reinvestment Coalition, the Independent Community Bankers of America, and the Bank Policy Institute filed opposition comments. The NCRC called the proposal “regulatory arbitrage” meant to avoid Community Reinvestment Act obligations and cited Stripe’s enforcement history and ongoing litigation as evidence of inadequate internal controls.19NCRC. NCRC Comment in Opposition to Stripe Inc’s National Trust Charter Application The OCC rejected those arguments, finding the proposed activities permissible for a national trust bank and the entity not subject to the CRA because it would not be an insured depository institution.20OCC. Bridge National Trust Bank Corporate Decision