Ninth Circuit Remands FCRA Case – Actual Injury Not Required for Article III Standing | Blogs | Consumer Class Defense Counsel

On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit remanded Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., Case No. 2:10-cv-05306-ODW-AGR on the basis that the district court erred in finding that the Plaintiff, Thomas Robins (“Robins”), did not have Article III “injury-in fact” standing to file his suit alleging violations of Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) §§1681b(b)(1), 1681e(b), and 1681j(a).

Robins alleged that Spokeo, Inc. (“Spokeo”), a website based provider of consumer reports, committed willful violations of the FCRA, §1681n, by including false information — specifically that the unemployed Robins had a graduate degree and was wealthy — in its consumer report.[1] Robins’ initial complaint contained “sparse” injury allegations, and the district court held that Robins failed to allege any “actual or imminent harm.”[2] Robins’ first amended complaint plead that Spokeo’s alleged incorrect consumer report had caused him actual injury to his employment prospects, including anxiety, stress, concern and/or worry regarding his minimal employment prospects.[3] Spokeo filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, alleging that Robins’ allegations were insufficient to show standing under Article III. The district court first dismissed, then upon interlocutory appeal granted, Spokeo’s motion.[4]

In remanding the case, the Ninth Circuit found that the FCRA does not require a showing of actual harm for standing, as the statute provides a private right of action for filing suit pursuant to §1681n.[5] Accordingly, a plaintiff, here Robins, can suffer a violation of a statutory right without suffering actual damages. Further, the court analyzed whether the rights conferred by the FCRA can be deemed “concrete, de facto injuries” which can be elevated for standing purposes.[6] The court determined that Robins met the two constitutional limitations on the FCRA’s conferred standing. One, he was “among the injured” by Spokeo, in that his consumer report contained inaccurate information. Second, the interests protected by the FCRA are sufficiently concrete and particularized that Congress is permitted to elevate them for standing purposes. The court also found that causation and redressability were satisfied in Robins; first amended complaint.[7]

The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Robins, and similar decisions from other jurisdictions, is instructive as it can be used by CRAs in assessing litigation strategy and the risk profile for the matter at issue.

[1] Robins, at 3-4.

[2] Id.

[3] Id. at 4.

[4] Id. at 4-5.

[5] Id. at 7-8.

[6] Id. at 9-10.

[7] Id.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.