Gary Sgouros v. TransUnion Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting defendants' argument that they should not be required to provide putative Plaintiffs' contact information because it was in the hands of a subcontractor
• rejecting defendants’ argument that they should not be required to provide putative Plaintiffs’ contact information because it was in the hands of a subcontractor
• ordering the defendant to “contact any of its subcontractors . . . that may have records relating to any potential class members” in order to facilitate notice
• holding job titles not relevant to conditional certification
• holding job titles not relevant to conditional certification
• first quoting Dinkel v. MedStar Health, Inc., 880 F. Supp. 2d 49, 53 (D.D.C .2012); then quoting Blount v. U.S. Sec. Assocs., 945 F. Supp. 2d 88, 93 (D.D.C. 2013)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).