13583296.1 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Civil Action No: 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT 

M. GABRIEL MCFARLAND, 

Plaintiff, 

 -vsTRANS UNION, EQUIFAX, and 

EXPERIAN INC., 

 Defendants. 

DEFENDANT EQUIFAX’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 

___________________________________________________________________________ 

 Defendant, Equifax Information Services LLC (“Equifax”), incorrectly identified in the 

Complaint as “Equifax,” files its Answer and Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint as follows: 

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

 In submitting its Answer and Defenses to the Complaint, Equifax denies all allegations 

contained in the unnumbered paragraphs and headings in the Complaint, and specifically denies 

any allegations in the Complaint that have not been otherwise specifically addressed herein, 

including any legal conclusions to which a response may be required. In response to the specific 

enumerated paragraphs in the Complaint, Equifax responds as follows: 

ANSWER

 1. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 1 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 2. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 2 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8
 

13583296.1 

2

 3. Equifax admits that Equifax Information Services LLC is a consumer reporting 

agency as that term is defined by the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681, et seq., and is 

incorporated in Georgia with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. 

 4. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 4 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 5. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 5 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 6. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 6 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 7. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 7 as they pertain to Equifax. Equifax 

is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining 

allegations in Paragraph 7 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 8. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 8 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 9. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 9 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 10. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 10 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 10 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 11. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 11 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 11 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 8
 

13583296.1 

3

 12. Responding to the allegations in Paragraph 12, Equifax admits that it sent Plaintiff 

a letter dated January 5, 2011 advising him that Compass Bank verified that the disputed account 

number *** 7721 was accurately reporting on his credit file as closed with a late payment. 

Equifax denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 12. 

 13. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 13 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 14. Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in Paragraph 14 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 15. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 15 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 16. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 16 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 16 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 17. Equifax restates and incorporates its responses to the preceding allegations as 

though fully set forth herein. 

 18. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 18 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 18 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 19. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 19 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 19 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 8
 

13583296.1 

4

 20. Equifax restates and incorporates its responses to the preceding allegations as 

though fully set forth herein. 

 21. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 21 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 21 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 22. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 22 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 22 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 23. Equifax denies the allegations in Paragraph 23 as they pertain to Equifax. 

Equifax is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in Paragraph 23 and, therefore, denies those allegations. 

 24. Equifax denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief set forth in his Prayer 

for Relief. 

DEFENSES

Without assuming the burden of proof where it otherwise rests with Plaintiff, Equifax 

pleads the following defenses to the Complaint: 

FIRST DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s Complaint fails, in whole or in part, to state a claim against Equifax upon 

which relief can be granted. 

SECOND DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s damages, if any, were not caused by Equifax, but by other persons or entities 

for whom or for which Equifax is not responsible. 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 8
 

13583296.1 

5

THIRD DEFENSE

 At all times relevant herein, Equifax maintained reasonable procedures in its handling of 

Plaintiff’s consumer credit file. 

FOURTH DEFENSE

 Equifax has complied with the Fair Credit Reporting Act in its handling of Plaintiff’s 

credit file, and is entitled to each and every defense stated in the Act and any and all limitations 

of liability.

FIFTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff has not sustained any damages. 

SIXTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s damages, if any, are caused by his own acts or omissions, or the acts or 

omissions of third parties other than Equifax. 

SEVENTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff has not alleged any injury in fact. 

EIGHTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages. 

NINTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages is barred or limited by the provisions of 15 U.S.C. 

§1681n.

TENTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks the imposition of punitive damages. Equifax adopts by 

reference the defenses, criteria, limitations, standards and constitutional protections mandated or 

provided by the United States Supreme Court in the following cases: BMW v. Gore, 517 U.S. 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 8
 

13583296.1 

6

559 (1996); Cooper Indus., Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., 532 U.S. 923 (2001) and State 

Farm v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003). 

ELEVENTH DEFENSE

 Plaintiff cannot establish the standard of willfulness under the Fair Credit Reporting Act 

as articulated by the Supreme Court in Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. Burr, 127 S. Ct. 2201 

(2007). 

TWELFTH DEFENSE

 Equifax denies each and every averment of Plaintiff’s Complaint not specifically 

admitted in this Answer. 

THIRTEENTH DEFENSE

 Equifax reserves the right to plead additional defenses that it learns of through the course 

of discovery. 

 WHEREFORE, having fully answered or otherwise responded to the allegations 

contained in Plaintiff’s Complaint, Equifax prays that: 

 (1) Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed in its entirety and with prejudice, with all costs 

taxed against Plaintiff; 

 (2) That Equifax be dismissed as a party to this action; 

 (3) That this lawsuit be deemed frivolous and Equifax recover from plaintiff its 

expenses of litigation, including but not limited to attorneys’ fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 

1681n(c) and 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(b); and 

 (4) That Equifax recover such other and additional relief, as the Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 8
 

13583296.1 

7

 Respectfully submitted this 17th day of August, 2011. 

 SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. 

/s/ Brian P. Gaffney 

By: Brian P. Gaffney 

 1200 Seventeenth Street 

 Tabor Center, Suite 1900 

 Denver, Colorado 80202 

 Tel: (303) 634-2000 

 Fax: (303) 634-2020 

 Email: bgaffney@swlaw.com 

Attorney for Defendant Equifax Information 

Services LLC 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 8
 

13583296.1 

8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on the 17th day of August, 2011, a true and correct copy of the 

above and foregoing document has been electronically filed with the foregoing Clerk of the 

Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following 

counsel and/or a copy is mailed via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed to those 

individuals who are non-CM/ECF participants: 

M. Gabriel McFarland 

Evans & McFarland LLC 

910 13th Street, Suite 200 

Golden, CO 80401 (CM/ECF) 

Paul W. Sheldon 

Strasburger & Price, LLP-Frisco 

2801 Network Boulevard #600 

Frisco, TX 75034-1872 (CM/ECF) 

Clifton J. Latiolais , Jr. 

Campbell, Latiolais & Ruebel, P.C. 

825 Logan Street 

Denver, CO 80203-3114 (CM/ECF) 

 

 s/Sharon Burkhalter

 Sharon Burkhalter 

Case 1:11-cv-02097-REB-KMT Document 4 Filed 08/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 8