Roe v. American Databank, LLC

Filing 84

NOTICE RE HEARING.. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 30, 2014. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/30/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9

ASTRAILIA I. DUNFORD, individually and
on behalf of all similarly situated,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

No. C 13-03829 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.
AMERICAN DATABANK LLC,

13

NOTICE RE HEARING

Defendant.
/

14
15

1.

Please bring to the hearing tomorrow all documents that could possibly be

16

relevant. Counsel who argue the motions must be prepared to find relevant documents

17

promptly upon request at the hearing.

18

2.

Section 1681b(b)(1)(A) requires that the “person who obtains [the] report from

19

the agency certif[y] to the agency” that it has complied with provisions of the FCRA and the

20

information in the report will not be used in violation of any applicable federal or state equal

21

opportunity law or regulation. In the present case, the person who obtained the report was

22

plaintiff herself. In the normal case, however, the person who obtains the report is the employer

23

or prospective employer. The employer or prospective employer would make the certification

24

required by Section 1681b(b)(1)(A). The Court has already inquired about what authority

25

allows Ms. Dunford to bring claims under Sections 1681b(b)(2)(A)(i), 1681b(b)(1),

26

1681c(a)(2), and 1681c(a)(5) in light of the fact that she — not American DataBank — gave

27

the report to San Diego City College, who shared it with the clinical programs.

28

raises a related point, namely, Section 1681b(b)(1)(A) refers to “the person who obtains [the]

This notice

report from the agency.” A tentative reading of this phrase seems to refer to the employer or

1

prospective employer, not the subject of the report. Plaintiff argues (Br. 2, 16) that defendant

2

agency violated the certification “requirement because facilities who use its reports to decide

3

whether to allow nursing students to participate in clinical rotations at their campuses d[id] not

4

provide [American DataBank] with the appropriate certification before using the reports.” In

5

other words, plaintiff argues that American DataBank failed to obtain certifications from the

6

clinical facilities (Dkt. No. 40 at 2, 16). But Ms. Berg, the associate dean at San Diego City

7

College, stated that “[American DataBank] was not involved in forwarding Ms. Dunford’s

8

background report to any of the clinical sites that reviewed it” (Berg. Decl. ¶ 10). How can

9

Section 1681b(b)(1)(A) apply when American DataBank provided the report only to plaintiff
and plaintiff herself sent the report to the school, who then shared it with the clinical programs?

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Did American DataBank ever directly send Ms. Dunford’s report to San Diego City College?

12

(If so, when?) If possible, please include this in the supplemental briefing due today and be

13

prepared to discuss this at the hearing tomorrow.

14
15

Dated: July 30, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2