Kamlesh Banga v. Equifax Information Services
This text of 473 F. App'x 712 (Kamlesh Banga v. Equifax Information Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
*713 MEMORANDUM **
Kamlesh Banga appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the California Consumer Credit Reporting Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Aguilera v. Baca, 510 F.3d 1161, 1167 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on statute of limitations grounds because Banga failed to file her action within two years of when she knew or should have known that defendant disclosed her credit report to third parties for promotional or other improper purposes. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681 p (action under Fair Credit Reporting Act must be filed two years after plaintiff discovers the violation or five years after the violation occurs, whichever is earlier); Cal. Civ.Code § 1785.33 (action under California Consumer Credit Reporting Act must be filed within two years after plaintiff knows or should have known of the violation but no more than seven years after the earliest violation).
Banga’s remaining contentions, including her alleged claims against Cal State 9 Credit Union, are unpersuasive.
Banga’s motion for referral to the court’s pro bono program is denied.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
473 F. App'x 712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kamlesh-banga-v-equifax-information-services-ca9-2012.