Kathy Grismore v. Rjm Acquisitions LLC ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            OCT 06 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                     U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    KATHY GRISMORE,                                   No. 09-15867
    Plaintiff - Appellant,            D.C. No. 2:08-cv-00529-DKD
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    RJM ACQUISITIONS LLC,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    David K. Duncan, Magistrate Judge, Presiding **
    Submitted September 13, 2010 ***
    Before:         SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Kathy Grismore appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment
    in her action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (c).
    ***
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant’s
    request for oral argument is denied.
    Fair Credit Reporting Act. We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . We
    review de novo. Donohue v. Quick Collect, Inc., 
    592 F.3d 1027
    , 1030 (9th Cir.
    2010). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, N. Mariana Islands
    v. United States, 
    399 F.3d 1057
    , 1060 (9th Cir. 2005), and we affirm.
    Summary judgment was properly granted for defendant because Grismore
    failed to raise a triable issue as to whether, among other things, defendant (1) made
    any false statements in connection with its attempts to collect the debt; (2) reported
    false information to the credit reporting agencies; or (3) continued its collection
    activity before verifying the debt after Grismore disputed it. See 15 U.S.C.
    §§ 1692e, 1692f, 1692g, 1681s-2(b); Donohue, 
    592 F.3d at 1033-34
     (false
    statements that are immaterial are not actionable under sections 1692e or 1692f).
    Grismore’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    09-15867
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-15867

Judges: Silverman, Callahan, Smith

Filed Date: 10/6/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024