On December 13, 2016, in Meyers v. Nicolet Restaurant of de Pere, LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit extended Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), to cases brought under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), by holding that a showing of injury apart from the statutory violation is required to satisfy standing ( (7th Cir. Dec. 13, 2016)).

After dining at Nicolet Restaurant of de Pere, the plaintiff Meyers was given a copy of his receipt and noticed that it did not truncate the expiration date of his credit card as required by the FACTA, an amendment to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) (15 U.S.C. § 1681c(g)(1)). Meyers then filed a putative class action in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin on behalf of individuals who were provided a non-compliant receipt at Nicolet, and sought statutory damages. The district court denied class certification and Meyers appealed.

Relying on the US Supreme Court decision in Spokeo, the Seventh Circuit held that the violation of a statute, without any potential real-world harm, is insufficient to satisfy the injury-in-fact requirement for Article III standing. In Spokeo, the plaintiff filed a putative class action against the defendant for posting false information on a website in violation of the FCRA. The Court held that a concrete injury is required even in the context of a statutory violation, and found that the plaintiff lacked standing. Similarly, Meyers' allegations did not show that he suffered any harm or created any appreciable risk of harm.

Additionally, the Seventh Circuit determined that:

For more on the issue of standing in class actions, see Practice Note, Non-Statutory Grounds for Challenging Class Actions: Standing and Ascertainability.