This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
Consumer Protection
Fair Credit Reporting Act

Brandon Bebault, Steven Arnold, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. DMG Mori USA Inc., and Does 1-10, inclusive

Published: Jan. 20, 2023 | Result Date: Dec. 22, 2021 | Filing Date: Sep. 17, 2019 |

Case number: 3:18-cv-02373-JD Settlement –  $825,000

Judge

James Donato

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Aashish Y. Desai
(Desai Law Firm PC)

Adrianne De Castro
(Desai Law Firm PC)


Defendant

Alexandria K. Hobson
(Litchfield Cavo LLP)

Ruzan Stepanyan
(Hamrick & Evans, LLP)


Facts

DMG Mori USA, Inc. is an Illinois corporation that produces cutting machine tools with nearly 7,400 employees. DMG Mori routinely obtains and uses information in consumer reports to conduct background checks on prospective employees and existing employees. Brandon Bebault worked for DMG Mor, Inc. from 2015 to 2018, while Steven Arnold worked for the company from January 28, 2018, to September 15, 2018. As part of their application process, DMG obtained their authorization to submit to a pre-employment background check. The background check required the two provide personal information such as prior alias used, prior residences, State Driver's License Number, present phone number, gender, age and birthday information, and Social Security Number. Bebault and Arnold, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, filed a nationwide class action complaint against DMG Mori USA, Inc. The class included all persons residing in the United States for whom DMG procured or caused to be procured a consumer report for employment purpose on or after April 19, 2016, to May 21, 2021.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs alleged that defendant willfully did not provide plaintiffs with a clear and conspicuous disclosure in writing that consisted solely of the disclosure that a consumer report may be obtained for employment purposes in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Plaintiffs contended the defendant knew or should have known its obligations under the FCRA because it had access to legal advice through its own general counsel's office and many class action cases had been filed and resolved on similar issues. Further, plaintiffs maintained that they suffered uniform concrete harm in the form of informational injuries and privacy injuries that entitled them to statutory damages, as well as costs and attorney's fees.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all contentions.

Result

DMG agreed to pay $825,000 to settle the claims with the funds being divided into two separate funds: $375,000 for a class distribution fund and $450,000 for an attorneys' fees fund.


#140097

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390