Green v. Southwest Credit Systems, L.P., 220 F. Supp. 3d 623

Pro se plaintiff Charles Green sued Southwest Credit Systems, L.P., alleging Southwest reported false credit information (an alleged Comcast bill tied to a wrong address), damaging his credit and causing denials of credit.
Green alleges he sent documents to Southwest and asked it to delete the information, but Southwest did not do so.
He pleads causes of action for defamation (libel/slander), willful noncompliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), furnisher liability under the FCRA for unreasonable procedures, and malicious/willful intent to injure.
Case was removed to federal court; Southwest moved for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c).
The court applies the Rule 12(b)(6)/Iqbal-Twombly standard and evaluates whether Green pleaded plausible FCRA or defamation claims.
The court finds Green failed to state a claim and dismisses the complaint without prejudice, allowing refiling if FCRA prerequisites are satisfied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether furnisher duties under §1681s-2(b) were triggered	Green says Southwest reported false information and failed to correct it after he disputed it	Southwest argues no CRA dispute was filed, so §1681s-2(b) duties never arose	Court: Dismiss — Green did not allege he disputed the account with a credit reporting agency, so furnisher duties under §1681s-2(b) were not triggered
Whether a private FCRA claim exists for disputes made directly to a furnisher	Green contends his direct communications with Southwest sufficed to require correction	Southwest contends §1681s-2(a) does not give a private right of action and §1681s-2(c) bars private suits for violations of §1681s-2(a)	Court: Dismiss — private cause of action exists only under §1681s-2(b) (post-CRA notice); direct disputes to a furnisher do not give rise to private FCRA claims
Whether Green's defamation (libel/slander) claim survives despite FCRA preemption	Green alleges Southwest falsely reported and acted maliciously, supporting defamation and willful FCRA claims	Southwest contends defamation claims are preempted unless they fit §1681h(e) narrow exception (malice and specific statutory contexts)	Court: Dismiss — Green's defamation claim does not fit §1681h(e) because Southwest is not a CRA disclosing under §§1681g/h and §1681m does not apply

Walker v. Kelly, 589 F.3d 127 (4th Cir. 2009) (Rule 12(c) standard same as Rule 12(b)(6))
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility pleading standard)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading must raise right to relief above speculative level)
Saunders v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 526 F.3d 142 (4th Cir. 2008) (no private suit for violations of §1681s-2(a); private suits limited to §1681s-2(b))
Ross v. FDIC, 625 F.3d 808 (4th Cir. 2010) (§1681h(e) preemption analysis for defamation claims)