Dean Pace v. Bank of America Corporation

MEMORANDUM

Dean Francis Pace appeals the district court’s order dismissing his first amended complaint and denying his motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

Pace, appearing pro se, filed a complaint claiming that Bank of America Corporation, and its wholly owned subsidiary FIA Card Services N.A., violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b), by inaccurately reporting two of his credit card accounts as delinquent and then failing to correct the error.

Under 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b), Appellees’ obligation to correct an error is triggered only if they receive a notice of a dispute from a credit reporting agency. See Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP, 584 F.3d 1147, 1154 (9th Cir.2009) (explaining that the § 1681s-2(b) “obligations are triggered upon notice of dispute — that is, when a person who furnished information to a CRA receives notice from the CRA that the consumer disputes the information”). Pace did not make this allegation. The district court properly held that Pace’s claim, based the allegation that he personally sent his dispute to…