United States District Court, D. Maryland
In re SUBPOENA of EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS, INC.
THE MIDDLESEX CORP. Defendant. MARSHALL MYRICK, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
Case: 8:17-cv-261-JDW-MAP in the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Florida
Lipton Hollander, United States District Judge.
Memorandum resolves the Motion to Quash (ECF 1) filed by
Employment Background Investigations, Inc.
(“EBI”) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45. It concerns
two subpoenas served on EBI by the plaintiff in the class
action lawsuit captioned Myrick v. The Middlesex
Corporation, Case No. 8:17-cv-261-JDW-MAP, pending in
the Middle District of Florida (“Florida Case” or
“Fla. Case”). The motion is supported by a memorandum
of law (ECF 1-1) (collectively, “Motion”), and
several exhibits. See ECF 1-2 through ECF 1-5.
not a party to the Florida case. The Motion was filed in the
District of Maryland because compliance with the subpoenas is
required in this District. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
the Motion reflects service on counsel for the parties in the
Florida Case (ECF 1 at 3), no party has responded to the
Motion. See docket. A hearing is not necessary to
resolve the Motion. See Local Rule 105.6. For the
reasons that follow, I shall grant the Motion.
Factual and Procedural Background
Myrick initiated the Florida Case on February 1, 2017,
alleging that The Middlesex Corporation
(“Middlesex”) violated the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq.
See ECF 1-4 (Complaint in Fla. Case). In particular,
Myrick alleges that, through an outside consumer reporting
firm, Middlesex conducts background checks on “the
majority of its prospective employees” and on
“current employees from time to time.”
Id. ¶¶ 16-17. But, he complains that
Middlesex “does not provide prospective or current
employees with a copy of their consumer reports before taking
adverse action against them based on the information in such
reports.” Id. ¶ 25.
asserts, id. at 27:
By failing to provide Plaintiff and other Putative Class
members with copies of their consumer reports prior to taking
adverse employment action against them based on the
information contained in such reports, Defendant willfully
disregarded . . . unambiguous regulatory guidance as well as
the plain language of the statute, in violation of 15 U.S.C.
§ 1681 b(b)(2)(A).
to plaintiff, he applied for a job as a construction worker
with Middlesex in September 2016. Id. ¶ 28. He
received an offer of employment, subject to a background
check. Id. ¶ 30. Middlesex then procured a
consumer report on plaintiff, conducted by EBI. Id.
¶ 31; see ECF 1-1 at 3. Thereafter, on November
28, 2016, plaintiff was terminated. Id. ¶ 32.
Plaintiff maintains that he was terminated as a result of the
content of his consumer report. Id. ¶ 33.
However, he alleges that he was given “no pre-adverse
notice whatsoever of the information contained in the
consumer report . . . .” Id.
answered the Complaint on March 17, 2017. Fla. Case, ECF 7.
Judge James Whittemore, to whom the case is assigned, issued
a Scheduling Order on May 2, 2017. Fla. Case, ECF 14. Among
other things, the Scheduling Order sets March 15, 2018, as
the deadline for the completion of discovery and provides
that trial will begin on August 6, 2018. Id.
19, 2017, plaintiff issued a subpoena to EBI, commanding a
corporate representative to appear at a deposition in
Baltimore on July 14, 2017, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45 and
Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6). ECF 1-2 (“Deposition
Subpoena”). The Deposition Subpoena provided that the
corporate representative must have knowledge sufficient to
testify as to 39 topics, including, id.:
7. Since February 1, 2015, EBI's policies, practices, and
procedures - including the governing contracts, agreements,
or statements of work - for furnishing employment purposed
consumer reports to Lowe's [sic] and any of its
8. The general substance, detail, and archive data available
to you regarding the content, substance, dates, and nature of
consumer reports you furnished for employment purposes since
February 1, 2015.
* * *
11. EBI's policies, practices, and procedures regarding
compliance with the FCRA, including but not limited to 15
U.S.C. § 1681b(b)-"Conditions for furnishing and
using consumer reports for employment purposes, " that
EBI shared with or provided to the Defendant in this lawsuit.
By definition this includes both online forms, and forms
given to applicants in person.
* * *
14. All agreements and contracts between EBI and Defendant.
15. Any investigations into EBI in any state or federal
agency for violations of the FCRA.
* * *
18. Since April 8, 2011, the materials- including training
manuals, PowerPoint presentations, live training, and
webinars - you made available to your employees pertaining to
compliance with ...