A fte r ex am in in g th e b rie fs a n d th e re c or d , w e h av e c on c lu d ed th atora l arg u m en t is * u n n ec es sa ry . T h u s, th e a p p ea l is su b m itt ed on th e b rie fs a n d th e re c or d . See F ED . R. A PP . P. 34(a)(2) (C). 

# United 

# S tates C o u rt o f A p p ea ls F or the Se ven th C ir cu it Ch i cago ,I l l i nois 60 604 Subm i tte d M ay 5, 20 10 * Deci ded M ay 5, 20 10 B efo re FR A N K H . E A ST E R B R O O K, Chie f Judg e JO H N L . C O FF E Y , Cir cu i tJudg e D A V ID F. H A M IL T O N , Cir cu i tJudg e N o. 09
- 3926 C HR I S T O P HE RE . WAS HI NG T O N, Plai nt i f f

-Appe l l ant, v. EQUI F AX I NF OR M ATI ON S ER VI CES LLC , D efend a nt-A pp ellee . A pp ealfro m the U ni ted S tat es Dist ri ct Court f orthe N or ther n Dis tr i ct o fInd i ana, F o r t W ay ne Di vi si o n. N o . 1: 08
- CV- 00 13 2- PPS P h ilip P . Sim on, Chie f Judg e . O R D E R Ch ri sto pher W ashi ngto n appeal s fro m an o rdergr anti ng sum m ar y j ud gm ent t o Eq uif ax Info rm ati on S er vi ces LL C on hi s cl ai m s under the F ai r Credi t Repor ti ng Act, 15 U .S.C . §§ 1 68 1-1 68 1x . W e a ffirm th e d ist ric t c ou rt ’s d ec isio n . NONP RE C E DE NT I AL DI S PO S I T I ON To be ci ted o nl y in acco rdance w i th F ED . R. A PP . P . 32.1N o. 09
- 3926 Page 2

W as hi ng to n’ s i den ti tya l l eg edly was s to l eni n 2 00 7. He as se r ts tha t he r epo r te d the i denti ty theft t o the three l eadi ng co nsum err epor ting ag enci es, i ncl ud i ng Equif ax ( though Eq uif ax has no r eco rd o fbeing co ntacte d dir ectly b y W ashi ngto n befor e thi s s uit ) . In 200 8 h e a p p lied for a loan bu t w as tu rn ed d ow n, he sa ys , bec au se of u n c or re c te d ina c c u ra c ies in hi s cr edi t r epo r t r es ul tingfr o m the the ft. Wash i ng to n s ue d Equi f ax , c l ai m i ngtha t th e com pany vi ol ate d the F CR A bydi sse m i nati ng f al se i nfo rm ati on about hi s cr edi t hi sto ry, 15 U . S. C. § 1 681e ( b) , and f ai l i ng to em plo y r eas onabl e pr oce du re s t o i nvest i gat e the ac curacy of its info rm at ion aft er h e re p or te d th e id en tit y th eft, i d. § 16 81 i(a). H e a lso cla im s th ath is c re d it p ro b lem s c au se d h is m ar ria ge to fail an d lefth im su icid al a n d u n ab le t o w or k. I n gr anti ng Equif ax’ s m oti on forsum m ar y j ud gm ent, the dist ri ct c ourtdeter m i ned th atW as h in gt on ’s c laim s fa iled be c au se h e h ad n otm ad e a n y s h ow in g th ath is c re d it file w as i naccurat e o r rebutted Equif ax’ s e vi dence thati t m ai ntai ned re aso nabl e pr oce du re s t o ensure the accura cy ofi ts re port s. In additi on the co urt concl ud ed that W ashi ngto n had n otd em on st ra te d th ath e s u ffer ed an y d am ag es . On app ealW ashi ngto n re ass er ts that Eq uif ax vi ol ate d the F CR A byf ai l i ng to re m ove i naccurat e i tem s fro m hi s cr edi t r epor t, ev en afterthe com pany w as noti fi ed of i naccurac i es. W e a gr ee w i th the di str i ct c ourtthatW ashi ngto n f ai l ed to o fferev i dence that w oul d cre ate a genui ne f act i ssue f ortr i al . W ashi ngto n did notpro du ce a ny ev i dence sh ow in g th ath is E qu ifax cr ed it re p or t w as ina c c u ra te , as re qu ire d by § 16 81 e(b ). SeeW antz v. Expe r i an Inf

o. So l ut i ons , 386 F.3d 82 9, 83 4 (7 th C ir. 20 04 ), abrogated on othe r grounds by Sa feco Ins. C o . of A m erica v. B urr, 551 U .S. 47(20 07 ); Henso n v . CS CC redit S ervs. , 29 F. 3d 280, 284 ( 7th Ci r. 19 94) . Nor di d he r ebut Equif ax’ s e vi dence thati t use s r eas onabl e pr oce du re s to a ss ur e th ati ts c o ns um err epo r ts a r e ac cur at e, a nd s uchpr o ce dur es pr o te ctthe c o m pany fro m liab ility u n d er bo th § 16 81 e(b ) an d § 16 81 i(a). Se eHe ns on , 29 F .3d at28 4. W as h in gt on als o c on te n d s th ath e a d eq u at ely p ro ve d d am ag es in t h e d ist ric t c ou rt . Altho ugh W as hi ng to n s ubmi tt ed hundr eds o fpa g es o fr ec o r ds to the c o ur t do cument i ng his m ed ical p roblem s, he did not esta bli sh thatthes e prob lem s (or an y othe r dam ages) w ere c au sa lly c on n ec te d to so m e v iola tio nby E qu ifax of th e F C R A . Se eCr ab i l l v. Tr ans U ni on, L . L . C. , 259 F.3d 66 2, 66 4 (7 th C ir. 20 01 ). A ccor dingly, we AF F I RM th e d ist ric t c ou rt ’s jud gm en t.