Cases

*722 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GREG N. STIVERS, District Judge. The United States Department of Education (“Department”) filed a motion to dismiss (DN 23) for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff was given the opportunity to respond; the matter is now ripe for adjudication. The

467 F.Supp.2d 627 (2006) Cynthia BYERSON, Kristina M. Cardwell, and Paul, Curley, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, Trans Union, LLC, and Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 3:06cv582. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. December 20, 2006.

522 F.Supp.2d 1222 (2007) Laura NELSON v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC; Arrow Financial Services, LLC, et al. No. CV 06-1568 RGK (PLAx). United States District Court, C.D. California. April 5, 2007. *1223 *1224 *1225 *1226

522 F.Supp.2d 822 (2007) Vilma SMITH f/k/a/ Vilma Escobedo, Plaintiff, v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, and CSC Credit Services, Inc., and Trans Union, LLC a/k/a Trans Union Corporation, and Lease Finance Group Limited Partnership a/k/a Citifinancial USA, Inc. a/k/a CIT Group, Inc., a/k/a The CIT Group/Consumer Finance, Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 2:07-CV-227-DF. United States District Cour

GARWOOD, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff-appellant Kenneth M. Morris (Morris) appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendant-ap-pellee Equifax Information Services, LLC (Equifax). On Morris’s claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), we reverse and remand. On Morris’s state law claim for libel, we affirm. Facts and Proceedings Below

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 22a0234p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ AHMED HAMMOUD, │ Plaintiff-Appellan

346 F.Supp.2d 1164 (2004) Kijafa R. DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC, Defendant. No. CV 02-P-2924-S. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division. September 15, 2004. *1167 Michael G. Graffeo, John D. Saxon PC, James D. Harper, James D. Harper PC, Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiff. Laura C

303 F.Supp.2d 685 (2004) Angela SCREEN v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SYSTEMS, LLC, et al. No. CIV.A.DKC 2003-3305. United States District Court, D. Maryland. January 15, 2004. *687 Sonya Anjanette Smith, Smith Morton LLC, Riverdale, MD, for Plaintiff: Nathan Daniel Adler, Neuberger Quinn Gielen Rubin and Gibber PA, Baltimore, MD,

Case: 24-40415 Document: 73-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/13/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-40415 ____________

Daniel D. Crabtree, United States District Judge Plaintiff Lucretia Stewart brings this lawsuit against defendants Equifax Information Services, LLC ("Equifax") and Credit One Bank, N.A. ("Credit One"), alleging that defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. All p

LOKEN, Circuit Judge. This is an interlocutory appeal of a district court order certifying four classes of Nebraska consumers, an appeal authorized by Rule 23(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Credit Management Services, Inc. (CMS) is a Nebraska corporation engaged in collecting consumer debts assigned to CMS by the original creditor (or by a prior assignee). CMS is a

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-2071 MICHAEL WOOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECURITY CREDIT SERVICES, LLC, doing business as EQUIPRO INVESTMENTS, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United Sta

ORDER BATTEN, District Judge. After a thorough review of the parties’ briefs, the record evidence, and applicable law, the Court issues the following order on all pending motions in this matter. I. Background A. Overview This putative nationwide class action arises from Plaintiff Robbie Hillis’s purchase of a service1

THOMAS W. THRASH, JR., United States District Judge This is a data breach case. It is before the Court on the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Consumer Class Action Complaint [Doc. 425]. For the reasons set forth below, the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Consumer Class Action Complaint [Doc. 425] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. I. Background On Se

THOMAS W. THRASH, JR., United States District Judge This is a securities fraud class action. It is before the Court on the Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 62]. For the reasons set forth below, the Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 62] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. I. Background This case arises out of a massive data breach incident. On September 7, 2017, the

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge: I. INTRODUCTION Sawabeh Information Services Company (“Siscom”) and its wholly owned subsidiary Edcomm, Inc. (“Edcomm”) (collectively “plaintiffs”) bring this action against former Edcomm officers and shareholders, Clifford Brody, Linda Eagle and David Shapp (“defendants”) arising out of the October 11, 2011 sale of all of

USCA11 Case: 20-10249 Date Filed: 06/03/2021 Page: 1 of 64 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-10249 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:17-md-02800-TWT In re Equifax Inc. Customer Da

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _________________ No. 21-2430 _________________ STEFAN INGRAM, Appellant v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC; WAYPOINT RESOURCE GROUP, LLC; COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC ___________

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-2632 JEFFREY CHAITOFF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court f

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _________________ No. 21-2430 _________________ STEFAN INGRAM, Appellant v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC; WAYPOINT RESOURCE GROUP, LLC; COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC ___________