Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
 
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
 
D
IMITRIY
S
IMONOFF
,No. 10-35595
Plaintiff-Appellant,
D.C. No.v.
2:09-cv-01517-RSLE
XPEDIA
, I
NC
.,OPINION
 Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Courtfor the Western District of WashingtonRobert S. Lasnik, District Judge, PresidingArgued and SubmittedMarch 8, 2011—Seattle, WashingtonFiled May 24, 2011Before: M. Margaret McKeown, Raymond C. Fisher, andRonald M. Gould, Circuit Judges.Opinion by Judge McKeown
6799
 
COUNSEL
David Oppenheim (argued), Rolling Meadows, IL; David S.Breskin, Breskin Johnson & Townsend PLLC, Seattle, Wash-ington, for the plaintiff-appellant.Britton F. Davis, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Seattle,Washington; Rodney G. Strickland, Jr. (argued) and LauraGrant, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Palo Alto, Califor-nia, for the defendant-appellee.
OPINION
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge:In 2003, Congress passed the Fair and Accurate CreditTransactions Act (“FACTA”), Pub. L. No. 108-159, 117 Stat.1952, an amendment to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15U.S.C. § 1681
et seq.
, in part to combat identity theft. FACTAprovides thatno person that accepts credit cards or debit cards forthe transaction of business shall print more than thelast 5 digits of the card number or the expiration dateupon any receipt provided to the cardholder at thepoint of the sale or transaction.15 U.S.C. § 1681c(g)(1). This restriction covers only “receiptsthat are electronically printed, and [does] not apply to transac-tions in which the sole means of recording a credit card ordebit card account number is by handwriting or by an imprintor copy of the card.”
 Id.
§ 1681c(g)(2).Expedia, Inc. runs a website that allows users to maketravel arrangements online. Like other merchants “thataccept[ ] credit cards or debit cards,”
see id.
§ 1681c(g)(1),
6802S
IMONOFF
v. E
XPEDIA
, I
NC
.
 
Expedia must comply with FACTA. Dimitriy Simonoff pur-chased travel arrangements through Expedia’s website.Expedia then emailed him a receipt, which included the expi-ration date of Simonoff’s credit card. He claims that thisemail receipt violates FACTA.The question we consider under FACTA is the meaning of the words “print” and “electronically printed” in connectionwith an emailed receipt. “Print” refers to many differenttechnologies—from Mesopotamian cuneiform writing on claycylinders to the Gutenberg press in the fifteenth century,Xerography in the early twentieth century, and modern digitalprinting—but all of those technologies involve the making of a tangible impression on paper or other tangible medium.
Seegenerally
S.H. Steinberg,
Five Hundred Years of Printing
(new ed. 1996). Although computer technology has signifi-cantly advanced in recent years, we commonly still speak of printing to paper and not to, say, iPad screens. Nobody says,“Turn on your Droid (or iPhone or iPad or Blackberry) andprint a map of downtown San Francisco on your screen.” Weconclude that under FACTA, a receipt that is transmitted tothe consumer via email and then digitally displayed on theconsumer’s screen is not an “electronically printed” receipt.We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Simonoff’s claimsunder Rule 12(b)(6).
ANALYSISI. F
ORUM
S
ELECTION
C
LAUSE
We first address a procedural aspect of the case—a forumselection clause. Simonoff initially filed an action in Illinoisstate court. Expedia removed the case to federal court andthen moved to dismiss the action on the basis of the forumselection clause in Expedia’s user agreement. Simonoff vol-untarily dismissed the action and re-filed his suit in state courtin King County, Washington. Expedia again removed the case
6803S
IMONOFF
v. E
XPEDIA
, I
NC
.
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
  • More From This User

    Notes
    Load more