10. This action has been brought and may be maintained as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because the proposed class is easily ascertainable and there is a well-defined community of interest in the litigation, as described further below.  11. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Without prejudice to later revision, the class which Plaintiff seeks to represent are composed of: Class I (FCRA Applicant Class): All persons who applied for employment with Bank of America commencing from two (2) years immediately preceding the filing of this lawsuit who (i) applied for employment with Bank of America; (ii) were the subject of a consumer report used by Bank of America for employment purposes; (iii) had the consumer report contain information on convictions occurring more than seven years prior to the consumer report; and (iv) were the subject of an adverse employment action by Bank of America. Class II (ICRAA Applicant Class): All California citizens who applied for employment with Bank of America commencing from four (4) years immediately preceding the filing of this lawsuit who (i) applied for employment with Bank of America; (ii) were the subject of a consumer report used by Bank of America for employment purposes; (iii) had the consumer report contain information on convictions occurring more than seven years prior to the consumer report; and (iv) were the subject of an adverse employment action by Bank of America.  13. Numerosity: This action is properly maintainable as a class action.  Although Plaintiff does not, as yet, know the exact size of each class and subclass, based upon the nature of the Defendants’ business, Plaintiff believes that there are numerous Class members, and that Class members are geographically dispersed throughout the United States of America.  Thus, each class and subclass is sufficiently numerous to make joinder impracticable, if not completely impossible. The disposition of the claims of the members of each class and subclass through this class action will benefit both the parties and this Court.  In addition, each class and subclass is readily identifiable from information and records in the possession of Bank of America, the members of each class and subclass, and third parties.   14. Commonality: There is a well-defined community of interest in the questions of law and fact involved affecting the parties to be represented.  The questions of law and fact to each class and subclass predominate over questions which may affect individual class and subclass members, including the following: (a) Whether the investigative consumer reports contained information regarding misdemeanor convictions older than seven years, and/or information regarding arrests that did not lead to convictions; (b) Whether Defendants willfully violated the FCRA, requiring statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a); (c) Whether Defendants’ conduct in violation of the FCRA, requiring statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 per Class Member pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a) (d) Whether Defendants’ conduct as described herein constitutes a violation of the UCL; (e) Whether Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief; and (f) Whether Defendants are liable for attorney fees and costs.  16.  Adequacy: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class.  Plaintiff has no interest that is contrary to or in conflict with those members of the Class he seeks to represent.  Furthermore, Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced and competent in the prosecution of complex class action litigation involving the statutory violations alleged herein to further ensure such protection and he intends to prosecute this action vigorously.   17. The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Class would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class, which would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the party opposing the Class and would lead to repetitious trials of the numerous common questions of fact and law.  Plaintiff knows of no difficulty that will be encountered in the management of this litigation that would preclude its maintenance as a class action. As a result, a class action is far superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy.  19. Notice to the members of the Class may be made by first-class mail addressed to all persons who have been individually identified by Defendant through access to Defendant's records.  Alternatively, if Defendant cannot produce a list of Class members' names and addresses, the members of the Class may be notified by publication in the appropriate media outlets, and by posting notices in Defendant's places of business.  20. Plaintiff and the Class have suffered irreparable harm and damages as a result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct as alleged herein.  Absent a representative action, Plaintiff and the Class will continue to suffer losses, thereby allowing these violations of law to proceed without remedy, and allowing Defendants to retain the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains.    21. In addition, Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief with respect to the Class as a whole.  28.  Plaintiff hereby incorporates by this reference each and every preceding paragraph of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.   29.  The Federal Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681 et seq. imposes limitations on the issuance of consumer reports.  30.  The Act defines consumer reports as any written, oral, or other communication of any information by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer’s eligibility for--(A) credit or insurance to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes; (B) employment purposes; or (C) any other purpose authorized under section 1681b of this title.  31.  Defendant is a person as defined by 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681a in that it furnished consumer reports to third parties bearing on a consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer’s eligibility for credit or insurance to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes and for employment purposes.  32.  On or about October 31, 2016 and on other dates currently unknown to Plaintiff, Defendant issued consumer reports about Plaintiff and issued consumer reports regarding the other members of the class during the class period defined above for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer’s eligibility for or insurance to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes; or for employment purposes.  34.  Defendant violated 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681c by furnishing consumer reports regarding the Plaintiff and the Class I Members that contained information of records of arrest and other adverse item of information including criminal charges that were dismissed, that, from date of entry, antedated the report by more than seven years.  35.  Defendant furnished consumer reports regarding the Plaintiff on or about October 31, 2016 and on other dates currently unknown that included information about a 1993 arrest and charges for false impersonation and driving with a suspended license. Both charges were dismissed, pursuant to Cal. Penal Code section 1203.4A.  36.  Defendant wilfully violated 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681c by instituting a policy and practice of identifying arrests and the filing of criminal charges that did not result in a conviction and reporting those events indefinitely even when they predated the reports by more than seven years. Defendant knew or was recklessly indifferent to the legal prohibitions on reporting certain arrests, charges and other adverse information but intentionally crafted and implemented a policy to report such information in violation of the 38.  Plaintiff hereby incorporates by this reference each and every preceding paragraph of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.   40.  Bank of America violated California Civil Code §1786.18 on or about May 15, 2016 as to himself and on other dates currently unknown to Plaintiff as to the other members of the Class II, by issuing investigative consumer reports about Plaintiff and the Class II members containing records of arrest, indictment, information, misdemeanor complaint, or conviction of crimes that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, antedated the report by more than seven years, including records from 1993 as to Plaintiff.  41. With respect to each of the aforementioned violations of the ICRAA provisions, Bank of America is liable to Plaintiff and the Class II members in the amount of the greater of the actual damages sustained as a result of the violations or $10,000 per violation pursuant to Civil Code § 1786.50 (a) (1).  42.  Bank of America’s violations were willful or grossly negligent within the meaning of Civil Code § 1786.50 (b), in that Bank of America knowingly failed to fulfill obligations without a good faith, reasonable belief in the legality of their actions.  43. Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all other Class II members, seeks all available remedies pursuant to Cal. Civ. Code § 1786.50, including statutory damages and/or actual damages, punitive damages, injunctive and equitable relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs. 44.  Plaintiff hereby incorporates by this reference each and every preceding paragraph of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.   45.  California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. prohibits unfair competition in the form of any “unlawful” and “unfair” business acts and practices. Defendants’ acts and practices described in this Complaint constitute “unlawful” and “unfair” business acts and practices within the meaning of Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq.  47.  The violations of these laws serve as “unlawful” business practices for purposes of Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. and remedies are provided therein under Business and Professions Code § 17203.  48. Defendants have also engaged in “unfair” business acts or practices in that the harm caused by Defendants’ wrongful conduct alleged above outweighs the utility of such conduct and such conduct offends public policy, is immoral, unscrupulous, unethical, deceitful and offensive, causes substantial injury to Plaintiff and Class members, and provides Defendants with an unfair competitive advantage over those employers and businesses that abide by the state and federal laws alleged to have been violated by Defendants herein.   49.  As a result of the conduct described above, Plaintiff and the Class II have no other adequate remedy of law in that absent injunctive relief from the Court, Defendant is likely to continue to injure Plaintiff and Class II members, and thus engendering a multiplicity of judicial proceedings.   50.  Pursuant to Business & Professions Code § 17203, Plaintiff and Class II members seek an order of this Court for equitable and/or injunctive relief in the form of requiring Defendants to correct their illegal conduct that is necessary and proper to prevent Defendants from repeating their illegal and wrongful practices as alleged above and to maintain the confidentiality of the information of Plaintiff and the Class II already obtained by Defendants way of their illegal and wrongful practices set forth above. Because this case is brought for the purposes of enforcing important rights affecting the public interest, Plaintiff and the Class II also seek the recovery of attorneys' fees and costs in prosecuting this action against Defendants under Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5 and other applicable law. 6.  This case arises out of Defendant’s unlawful policies and procedures by which it obtains and uses consumer reports of applicants seeking employment but fails to provide applicants with the statutorily required disclosures, conducts investigative consumer reports for an impermissible purpose, and does not  lacks the privacy policy required by law.  Further, the investigative consumer reports include convictions that occurred more than seven years prior to the investigative consumer report was generated. For these violations, Plaintiff and members of the Class are seeking statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 under the FCRA, actual damages under the ICRAA, and injunctive relief and restitutionary disgorgement under the UCL.  7.  Defendant Bank of America is a “person” under the FCRA, as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b). Plaintiff and all those similarly situated qualify as “consumers” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c). As a matter of policy and practice, Defendant obtains and uses consumer reports on applicants seeking employment with Bank of America. The consumer reports used by Defendants qualify as “consumer reports” under the FCRA, as defined by 15 U.S.C § 1681a(d) because the reports indicate the consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, or mode of living, and are used to consider the consumer for employment. These reports also qualify as an “investigative consumer report” under Cal. Civil Code § 1786.2(c).  9.  As a result of Defendant’s wrongful acts and omissions, Plaintiff and others similarly situated have been injured including, without limitation, having their privacy and statutory rights violated in violation of the FCRA and the ICRAA. Plaintiff seeks, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, statutory, actual, and compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and expenses of litigation including costs and attorney fees. FOR VIOLATION OF THE INVESTIGATIVE CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES ACT, CIVIL CODE § 1786.18 (On behalf of the Plaintiff and the Class II Members Against Defendant Bank of America)  FOR VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE § 17200, ET SEQ.) (On Behalf of the Plaintiff and Class II Members Against All Defendants)  FOR VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL CREDIT REPORTING ACT (Violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(2)(B) and 15 U.S.C. § 1681m) (On Behalf of Plaintiff and Class I Against All Defendants) 