Case 1:09-cv-04032 Document 27 Filed 12/02/09 Page 1 of 11 Maw UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION EDUARD SHLAHTICHMAN, ) Plaintiff, } 09 CV 4032 v. ; Judge John W, Darrah 1-800 CONTACTS, INC. } Defendant. } MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ‘This case arises out of alleged violations of 15 U.S.C. § 1681c(g) of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”). This case comes before the Court on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated below, the Motion to Dismiss is granted. BACKGROUND ‘The following facts are alleged in the Complaint. Defendant 1-800 CONTACTS (“Defendant”) is a corporation that sells contact lenses and related items over the inteet. On June 2, 2009, Plaintiff, Eduard Shlahtichman, used his credit card to purchase contact lenses over the internet from Defendant. On that same day, Plaintiff received at his home a computer- generated receipt, which displayed the expiration date of the Plaintiff's credit card in response to his internet purchase from Defendant. ‘On July 6, 2009, Plaintiff notified the Court that his state-court complaint, seeking statutory damages for a “willful” violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681¢(g) of FACTA, had been removed to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 (a). On August 14, 2009, Defendant moved to dismiss the Complaint.Case :09-cv-04032 Document 27 Filed 12/02/09 Page 2 of 11 LEGAL STANDARD “A motion under Rule 12(b)(6) challenges the sufficiency of the complaint.” Christensen v. County of Boone, Ill., 483 F.3d 454, 458 (7th Cir. 2007). Under the federal notice pleading standards, “a plaintif?s complaint need only provide a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, sufficient to provide the defendant with fair notice of the claim and its basis.” Tamayo v. Blagojevich, $26 F.3d 1074, 1081 (7th Cir. 2008) {internal quotations omitted). When considering a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the complaint is construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff; all well-pleaded factual allegations are accepted as true, and all reasonable inferences are construed in the plaintifi's favor. Id However, a complaint must allege “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” to survive a motion to dismiss. Bell Atlantic Corp. v Twombly, 550 US. 544, $47 (2007). For a claim to have facial plausibility, a plaintiff must plead “factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Igbal, __U.S.__, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (igbal). Thus, “threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” /gbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949. Further, the amount of factual allegations required to state a plausible claim for relief depends on the complexity of the legal theory alleged. Limestone Dev. Corp. v. Village of Lemont, 520 F.3d 797, 803 (7th Cir. 2008). Additionally, determining whether a complaint should survive a motion to dismiss is a “context= specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense.” Igbat, 129 8, Ct. at 1950. To survive a motion to dismiss, the well-pleaded facts of the complaint must allow the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct. /d.Case :09-cv-04032 Document 27 Filed 12/02/09 Page 3 of 11 ANALYSIS Plaintiff's claim fails because e-mail order confirmations are not entitled to FACTA. protection. In 2003, Congress amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act by passing the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act. FACTA imposes regulations that either demand or forbid the disclosure of consumers' credit information in specific circumstances. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681c. ‘The subsection of FACTA at issue in the instant case imposes a limitation upon the disclosure of credit and debit card information by those who accept the cards for business transactions. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681¢(g). The applicable portion of FACTA reads, in full: (g) Truncation of credit card and debit card numbers (1) In general Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no person that accepts credit cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction, (2) Limitation ‘This subsection shall apply only to receipts that are electronically printed, and shall not apply to transactions in which the sole means of recording a credit card or debit eard account number is by handwriting or by an imprint or copy of the card. 3) Effective date This subsection shall become effective- (A) 3 years after December 4, 2003, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is in use before January 1, 2005; and (B) 1 year after December 4, 2003, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is first put into use on or after January 1, 2005