Lawrence Saccato v. Discover Financial Services, I
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
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 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(e) (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 al leged a violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) because Saccato failed to allege that a credit reporting…