A recent case in the Northern District of Georgia confirms that when evaluating whether a tradeline in a consumer report is accurate, a court will consider the entire record in context and not focus on individual elements in isolation. See Ellis v. Warehouse Home Furnishings Distribs., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 225572 (N.D. Ga. 2020).
For those of you who happened to somehow miss CPW’s prior coverage of the impact of the November election on data privacy litigation, not to worry. CPW’s Lydia de la Torre, Glenn Brown, Kristin Bryan and Aaron Garavaglia have an article in Law360 expanding upon their prior analysis. As they explain:
The U.S. is in
The United States is in the process of completing its 59th presidential election and electing its 46th president. A change in administrations is inevitably accompanied by a change in executive priorities. Assuming that Vice President Biden is sworn in as President on January 20, 2021, the area of data privacy will likely be of particular
The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) maintains the Specially Designated Nationals (“SDN”) list, which is published to identify suspected terrorists and other bad actors. US persons are generally prohibited from dealing with anyone on the list, so companies and governments regularly run checks against the SDN list and other
Cyber insurance is top of mind lately due to heightened cyber vulnerabilities caused by an expanding remote workforce. Thankfully, Consumer Privacy World privacy pros provided some great guidance in their article “CGL Exclusions For Cyberattacks and Loss of Electronic Data: Is There A Gap In Your Coverage” published in the American Bar Association’s
In a recent case from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania[1], the court provided some helpful clarifications regarding the reinvestigation obligations of a consumer reporting agency (“CRA”) under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). Section 611(a) of the FCRA requires a CRA to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of any item of information in a
It almost beggars belief, but after numerous drafts and hundreds of comments, the regulations promulgated under the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 are now final, though with a few unexpected changes. Read more about it here at our sister blog Security & Privacy Bytes!
A recent decision in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania confirms Third Circuit precedent that an employer’s failure to provide a consumer with notice of their rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), as required by the FCRA, does not cause an injury-in-fact where the plaintiffs ultimately became aware of their rights and timely brought
As of today, July 1, 2020, the California Attorney General (“AG”) will begin enforcing the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”), which went into effect on January 1, 2020. Under the CCPA, the AG may recover civil penalties of up to $2,500 for each violation and up to $7,500 for each intentional violation. The
In a class action involving an allegation that an employer failed to give the “stand-alone” disclosure that is required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) before obtaining a consumer report, the Ninth Circuit clarified what is necessary in order to have Article III standing in this context.
Section 604(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FCRA requires that