Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-297_4g25.pdf
Page Number: 35.0

4 

TRANSUNION LLC v. RAMIREZ 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

concerning  him,  §1681e(b);  TransUnion  willfully  failed  to 
disclose to him all the information in his credit file by with-
holding the true version of his credit report, §1681g(a)(1);
and  TransUnion  willfully  failed  to  provide  a  summary  of 
rights when it sent him the courtesy letter, §1681g(c)(2).

Ramirez  also  sought  to  represent  a  class  of  individuals
who had received a similar OFAC letter from TransUnion. 
“[E]veryone in the class: (1) was falsely labeled . . . a poten-
tial OFAC match; (2) requested a copy of his or her credit
report  from  TransUnion;  and  (3)  in  response,  received  a 
credit-report mailing with the OFAC alert redacted and a 
separate OFAC Letter mailing with no summary of rights.” 
Id., at 1022. 

The jury found in favor of the class on all three claims.
And because it also determined that TransUnion’s miscon-
duct was “willfu[l],” §1681n(a), the jury awarded each class
member $984.22 in statutory damages (about $8 million to-
tal) and $6,353.08 in punitive damages (about $52 million
total).

TransUnion  appealed,  arguing  that  the  class  members
lacked standing.  The Ninth Circuit disagreed, explaining
that “TransUnion’s reckless handling of OFAC information
exposed every class member to a real risk of harm to their 
concrete privacy, reputational, and informational interests 
protected by the FCRA.”  Id., at 1037.1 

II 
A 
Article  III  vests  “[t]he  judicial  Power  of  the  United
States”  in  this  Court  “and  in  such  inferior  Courts  as  the 
Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”  §1. 

—————— 

1 TransUnion also contends that Ramirez’s claims and defenses are not 
typical of those of the class.  The Court declines to reach that question
because its jurisdictional holding is dispositive.  Ante, at 27.  In my view, 
the District Court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the class given 
the similarities among the claims and defenses at issue.