Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-297_4g25.pdf
Page Number: 8.0

4 

TRANSUNION LLC v. RAMIREZ 

Opinion of the Court 

businesses  avoid  transacting  with  individuals  on  OFAC’s
list. 

When  this  litigation  arose,  Name Screen  worked  in  the
following way: When a business opted into the Name Screen 
service,  TransUnion  would  conduct  its  ordinary  credit 
check  of  the  consumer,  and  it  would  also  use  third-party 
software  to  compare  the  consumer’s  name  against  the
OFAC list.  If the consumer’s first and last name matched 
the first and last name of an individual on OFAC’s list, then 
TransUnion would place an alert on the credit report indi-
cating that the consumer’s name was a “potential match” to 
a name on the OFAC list.  TransUnion did not compare any 
data  other  than  first  and  last  names.  Unsurprisingly,
TransUnion’s Name Screen product generated many false
positives.  Thousands of law-abiding Americans happen to 
share a first and last name with one of the terrorists, drug
traffickers, or serious criminals on OFAC’s list of specially 
designated nationals.

Sergio Ramirez learned the hard way that he is one such
individual.  On February 27, 2011, Ramirez visited a Nis-
san dealership in Dublin, California, seeking to buy a Nis-
san Maxima.  Ramirez was accompanied by his wife and his 
father-in-law.  After Ramirez and his wife selected a color 
and negotiated a price, the dealership ran a credit check on
both  Ramirez  and  his  wife.    Ramirez’s  credit  report,  pro-
duced  by  TransUnion,  contained  the  following  alert: 
“***OFAC ADVISOR ALERT - INPUT NAME MATCHES 
NAME ON THE OFAC DATABASE.”  App. 84.  A Nissan 
salesman told Ramirez that Nissan would not sell the car 
to him because his name was on a “ ‘terrorist list.’ ”  Id., at 
333.  Ramirez’s  wife  had  to  purchase  the  car  in  her  own 
name. 

The next day, Ramirez called TransUnion and requested 
a copy of his credit file.  TransUnion sent Ramirez a mailing 
that same day that included his credit file and the statuto-
rily required summary of rights prepared by the CFPB.  The