In Marshall v. Swift River Academy, 2009 WL 1112768 (9th Cir. 2009), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit confirmed (for the third time) that 15 USC 1681s-2(a) affords no private right of action. 


Marshall may not maintain a claim under the FCRA for violation of Section 1681s-2(a), which imposes certain duties on those who furnish information to consumer reporting agencies (“CRAs”) in order to encourage accurate reporting. Sections 1681n and 1681 o create a private right of action authorizing consumers to sue anyone who willfully or negligently fails to comply with a FCRA consumer requirement. However, Section 1681 s-2(c) provides that, except for suits brought by government entities, Sections 1681n and 1681 o do not apply to violations of Sections 1681s-2(a) or 1681s-2(e). Section 1681s-2(d) further emphasizes those statutory provisions “shall be enforced exclusively” by federal and state officials. Moreover, we have at least twice specifically held that consumers may not maintain an action for violation of Section 1681s-2(a). Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP, 552 F.3d 1008, 1014 (9th Cir .2009) (“Duties imposed on furnishers under [Section 1681 s-2(a) ] are enforceable only by federal or state agencies.”); Nelson v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp., 282 F.3d 1057, 1059-60 (9th Cir.2002) (“Congress limited the enforcement of the duties imposed by § 1681 s-2(a) to governmental bodies.”).