Shueon Mallory brought the lawsuit against Checkr Inc., a prominent background screening company that provides employment verification services to employers nationwide. The nature of Mallory's claims against the San Francisco-based company was not detailed in the brief judgment entry.
Judge Polster provided no explanation for the dismissal in the judgment entry, referring only to "the reasons set forth in the Court's Memorandum of Opinion and Order." The judge's certification under 28 U.S.C. ยง1915(a)(3) indicates he found the case so lacking in merit that any appeal would be frivolous, a determination that can prevent indigent plaintiffs from proceeding on appeal without paying court fees.
The case appears to have been resolved at an early stage, with the judgment entry being only the sixth document filed in the docket since the case was initiated in the Northern District of Ohio's Eastern Division.
The certification against a good faith appeal is a significant procedural hurdle that could effectively end the litigation, as it suggests the court found Mallory's legal theories fundamentally flawed. Consumer lawsuits against background check companies have been increasingly common, often alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.