WhatsApp v. NSO Group: $4.4M judgment Litigation

Meta’s WhatsApp won a judgment holding Israeli spyware maker NSO Group liable for hacking about 1,400 users through a WhatsApp zero-click exploit, and, more than the sharply reduced damages, a permanent injunction that threatens NSO’s core business.

LATEST DEVELOPMENT · SEP 10, 2026

Judge Hamilton heard WhatsApp’s contempt motion on August 20, 2026, continued from July 16 at NSO’s request, and took it under submission. WhatsApp filed a supplemental submission on August 27, NSO responded on September 3, and the parties reported on post-judgment discovery on September 10, 2026. No contempt ruling has issued. In the Ninth Circuit (No. 25-7380), briefing on NSO’s appeal of the liability finding, the $4.45M judgment and the permanent injunction closed on July 1, 2026, and no argument date has been set.

BACKGROUND

WhatsApp sued NSO Group in the Northern District of California in October 2019 under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California’s Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, after NSO’s Pegasus spyware exploited a WhatsApp vulnerability to target roughly 1,400 users, including journalists and activists. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton found NSO liable on summary judgment in December 2024, and in May 2025 a jury awarded $444,719 in compensatory damages and about $167.25M in punitive damages.

On October 17, 2025, Judge Hamilton held the $167.25M punitive award unconstitutionally excessive and remitted it to $4,002,471, nine times the compensatory award; WhatsApp accepted the remittitur on October 31, and on November 12, 2025 the court entered a permanent injunction barring NSO from targeting WhatsApp, reverse-engineering the service or possessing its code, together with a final judgment of $4,447,190. The $167M jury figure is therefore historical. NSO noticed its appeal of liability, damages and the injunction to the Ninth Circuit (No. 25-7380) on November 19, 2025 and sought a stay, which was not granted. Briefing closed with NSO’s reply on July 1, 2026; civil-society amici filed in May 2026 urging the court to keep the injunction. On June 8, 2026 WhatsApp moved to hold NSO in contempt over alleged renewed targeting.

TIMELINE

AUG 20, 2026HEARING

Contempt motion argued and taken under submission

After a continuance from July 16, Judge Hamilton heard WhatsApp’s contempt motion and ordered a joint status report. WhatsApp and NSO filed supplemental submissions on August 27 and September 3, 2026.

courtlistener.com
JUN 29, 2026FILING

WhatsApp files reply brief in support of contempt motion against NSO

WhatsApp filed a reply in further support of its motion to hold NSO Group in contempt, rebutting NSO’s opposition which argued WhatsApp had not adequately linked the alleged violative conduct to NSO. WhatsApp countered that NSO itself built the anonymizing infrastructure that creates this uncertainty.

WhatsApp files reply in support of contempt order against NSO in US
JUN 8, 2026PROCEDURAL

WhatsApp files contempt motion over alleged renewed targeting

WhatsApp asked the district court to hold NSO in contempt for allegedly continuing to target its users after the injunction.

WhatsApp takes NSO Group back to court for violating its spyware ban
MAY 2026PROCEDURAL

Civil-society groups file amici to preserve the injunction

Access Now, the Knight Institute and others urged the Ninth Circuit to keep the injunction in place.

WhatsApp v. NSO Group — case page
NOV 19, 2025APPEAL

NSO appeals liability, damages and injunction to the Ninth Circuit

NSO docketed an appeal (No. 25-7380) and sought to stay the permanent injunction pending review.

WhatsApp v. NSO Group — case page
NOV 12, 2025JUDGMENT

Permanent injunction and $4.45M final judgment entered

The court barred NSO from targeting WhatsApp, reverse-engineering the service or possessing its code, and entered final judgment for $4,447,190.

courtlistener.com m.thewire.in
OCT 17, 2025JUDGMENT

Court remits punitive damages to $4,002,471

Judge Hamilton held the $167.25M punitive award excessive and remitted it to nine times compensatory damages. WhatsApp accepted the remittitur on October 31, 2025.

NSO Ordered to Stop Hacking WhatsApp, but Damages Cut to $4 Million
MAY 6, 2025AWARD

Jury awards $444,719 compensatory and $167.25M punitive damages

A California jury found NSO liable for damages over the hacking of roughly 1,400 WhatsApp users.

NSO Ordered to Stop Hacking WhatsApp, but Damages Cut to $4 Million
DEC 2024JUDGMENT

Court finds NSO liable on summary judgment

Judge Hamilton held NSO liable under the CFAA and California law for unauthorized access to WhatsApp’s systems.

NSO Ordered to Stop Hacking WhatsApp, but Damages Cut to $4 Million
OCT 29, 2019FILING

WhatsApp sues NSO Group over Pegasus exploit

WhatsApp alleged NSO used a zero-click WhatsApp vulnerability to deliver Pegasus spyware to about 1,400 users.

WhatsApp v. NSO Group — case page

EXPERIMENTAL AI FORECAST

HOW IT IS MADE →

Predicted outcome: Claimant win
Model-assigned probability: about 58%
Timeframe: late 2027 to mid-2028
Model confidence: medium

The most likely end is a Ninth Circuit affirmance that leaves WhatsApp’s liability finding, the $4,447,190 judgment and the permanent injunction essentially intact, at roughly 58 percent, with a decision probably landing between late 2027 and mid-2028 given that briefing closed on July 1, 2026 and no argument date is set. The strongest driver is posture: NSO already lost its immunity theory in this same circuit, liability was resolved on summary judgment against a defendant that withheld the Pegasus source code in discovery, and appellants reverse civil judgments in the Ninth Circuit well under a third of the time. The remittitur cuts both ways in NSO’s favor and against it, since Judge Hamilton already trimmed the punitive award from $167.25 million to a 9:1 ratio, which removes the easiest excessiveness argument while giving the panel a clean, well-reasoned order to affirm. The denial of a stay and the pending contempt proceeding also signal a district court unlikely to be second-guessed on the equitable relief, though the injunction’s scope is the single piece most exposed to narrowing on remand. The leading alternative, at roughly 25 percent, is a split result in which the panel affirms liability but vacates or narrows the injunction or remands on the punitive multiplier, leaving the compensatory $444,719 core untouched. A negotiated resolution is unlikely, near 10 percent, because Meta’s interest is in preserving the injunction and the precedent rather than collecting a sum that is trivial to it, and NSO cannot buy that relief back cheaply. Expect the contempt motion to produce compliance-focused relief, targeted discovery and possibly modest monetary sanctions rather than a case-altering coercive order.

Appellate base rate strongly favors affirmance of civil judgment · Liability rested on summary judgment plus NSO discovery failures · Remittitur to 9:1 defuses main excessiveness argument · Meta wants injunction precedent, not money, so settlement unlikely · Injunction scope is the most vulnerable element on appeal

Generated automatically by claude-opus-5 on Sep 13, 2026 from this case’s record on this site, and published without editorial review. The probability is the model’s judgment, not a measured frequency; there is no established validation record for these forecasts. Not legal or investment advice. How the forecasts are made →