A former Amazon employee has lost her appeal in a class action lawsuit against the company, alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Lovenia Scott filed the complaint on January 8, 2020, in San Francisco City & County Superior Court against Golden State FC, LLC (now known as Amazon.com Services LLC) and Amazon.com, Inc.
Scott's case centers around a background check conducted by Amazon when she applied for a job at an Amazon fulfillment center in September 2016. She claimed that Amazon violated the FCRA by obtaining her background check without providing a compliant disclosure form. Scott authorized the background check and began working for Amazon on October 31, 2016. Three years later, after leaving the company, she initiated legal action.
Amazon initially moved for summary judgment on the grounds that Scott's claim was time-barred under the FCRA’s statute of limitations. The trial court denied this motion due to insufficient evidence from Amazon. After conducting further discovery, Amazon filed a second motion for summary judgment with additional evidence addressing this gap. This time, another superior court judge granted the motion, ruling that Scott’s claim was indeed time-barred.
Scott argued that the trial court erred in allowing a successive summary judgment motion and in finding her action time-barred. However, the appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision. The court noted that Scott had constructive notice of the background check as early as October 31, 2016—the date she started her employment—since her job offer was contingent upon passing this check. Despite having multiple ways to confirm whether a background check had been performed, Scott did not pursue any of them.
The appellate court concluded that by October 31, 2016, or even earlier when she received an email about new-hire orientation on October 21, 2016, Scott should have known about the background check. Since she filed her lawsuit more than two years later in January 2020, it was deemed untimely under FCRA’s statute of limitations.
The judges who concurred with this decision were Smiley J., Brown P.J., and Goldman J., with Case ID A167221.