Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wis.

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

February 19, 2016, Argued; September 8, 2016, Decided

No. 15-3127


 [*819]  Rovner, Circuit Judge. In response to the burgeoning problem of identity theft, when Congress enacted the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA) in 2003, it included within  [*820]  the Act a provision to reduce the amount of potentially misappropriateable information produced in credit and debit card receipts. The Act prohibits merchants from printing on the receipt the credit card expiration date and more than the last five digits of the credit or debit card number. The plaintiff in this case, Jeremy Meyers, used his credit card to make purchases at two stores owned by the defendant, [**2]  the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin, and received an electronically-printed receipt at each store that included more than the last five digits of his credit card as well as the card's expiration date. Meyers brought a putative class action in the eastern District of Wisconsin for violations of FACTA, but the district court determined that the defendant, an Indian Tribe, was immune from suit under the Act. Meyers appeals and we affirm.

The facts in this case are simple and not in dispute. Between February 6 and 17, 2015, Meyers used his credit card to make purchases at the Oneida Travel Center and two Oneida One Stop retail locations in and around Green Bay, Wisconsin. All three stores are owned and operated by a federally-recognized Indian tribe, the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin. At each store he received electronically printed receipts that included more than the last five digits of his credit card as well as the card's expiration date. He alleges that the Tribe issued these receipts in violation of FACTA.

] FACTA, an amendment to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, states that,

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

836 F.3d 818 *; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 16515 **

JEREMY MEYERS, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ONEIDA TRIBE OF INDIANS OF WISCONSIN, Defendant-Appellee.

Subsequent History: US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians, 137 S. Ct. 1331, 197 L. Ed. 2d 518, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 1925 (U.S., Mar. 20, 2017)

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. No. 1:15-cv-00445-WCG — William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge.

Meyers v. Nicolet Rest. of De Pere, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44699 (E.D. Wis., Apr. 1, 2016)Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wis., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189669 (E.D. Wis., Sept. 4, 2015)


tribes, sovereign immunity, abrogate, immunity, district court, tribal, threshold, subject matter jurisdiction, unequivocally, violations, domestic, merits, credit card, municipality, concrete, parties, courts, expiration date, federal court, debit card, grounds, printed, digits, cases

Banking Law, Banking & Finance, Consumer Protection, Fair Credit Reporting, Civil Procedure, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Affirmative Defenses, Immunity, Governments, Federal Government, Claims By & Against, Preliminary Considerations, Jurisdiction, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Justiciability, Standing, Injury in Fact, Constitutional Law, Case or Controversy, Elements, Judicial Officers, Judges, Discretionary Powers, Appeals, Remands, Native Americans, Tribal Sovereign Immunity, Legislation, Interpretation, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Domestic Security