LAWRENCE SACCATO V. DISCOVER FINANCIAL SERVICES, I, No. 11-35895 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOV 26 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LAWRENCE JAMES SACCATO, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 11-35895 D.C. No. 6:11-cv-03002-HO v. MEMORANDUM * DISCOVER FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael R. Hogan, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 13, 2012 ** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. Lawrence James Saccato appeals pro se from the district court s judgment dismissing his action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). district court s dismissal for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), Romano v. Bible, 169 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 1999), and we affirm. The district court properly concluded that 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a) did not create a private right of action and, thus, Saccato failed to state a claim under this section. See Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP, 584 F.3d 1147, 1162 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a) does not create a private right of action). Saccato s argument that the 2010 Federal Trade Commission regulations create a private cause of action is unpersuasive. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(c) (excluding violations of subsection (a) of this section, including any regulations issued thereunder from the FCRA s private enforcement provisions). The district court properly dismissed Saccato s action to the extent that it alleged a violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) because Saccato failed to allege that a credit reporting agency ( CRA ) had notified defendant of his dispute. See Gorman, 584 F.3d at 1154 ( [The duties under subsection (b)] arise only after the furnisher receives notice of dispute from a CRA; notice of a dispute received directly from the consumer does not trigger furnishers duties under subsection (b). ). AFFIRMED. 2 11-35895