Sarmad Syed v. M-I, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that standing existed when violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(2) resulted in 25 plaintiff’s confusion and caused plaintiff to sign authorization plaintiff would not have otherwise 26 signed
• holding that the FCRA provision requiring prospective employers to obtain a consumer’s consent before obtaining a credit report in a standalone document protected a concrete informational and privacy interest
• holding that a plaintiff had standing under the Fair Credit Reporting Act when the court could “fairly infer” that his alleged confusion caused him to sign a liability waiver he otherwise would not have
• concluding that after “[d]rawing all reasonable inferences in favor 11 of the nonmoving party,” the Ninth Circuit could “fairly infer” that plaintiff’s alleged confusion 12 caused him to sign a liability waiver he otherwise would not have
• concluding that the plaintiff’s claims were 19 sufficient to infer that he was deprived of his statutory rights under the FCRA and was not aware 20 that he was signing a waiver authorizing a credit check when he signed the disclosure form at 21 issue
• noting that Congress’ purpose to protect consumers from improper invasions of privacy would be frustrated in the absence of a clear disclosure because job applicants would not understand what they were authorizing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Sarmad Syed v. M-I, LLC

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Sarmad Syed v. M-I, LLC
  Ninth Circuit· 2017-03-20