Ninth Circuit Reverses $140M CenturyLink FCRA Class Action Verdict in Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink

On September 22, 2026, the Ninth Circuit reversed the $140 million Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) jury verdict against CenturyLink, now known as Lumen Technologies, and sent Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink, Inc. back to the District of Arizona. The panel held that CenturyLink’s reading of the FCRA was not objectively unreasonable, so under Safeco it could not be held liable for a willful violation. There is no CenturyLink claim form, settlement fund or payment deadline.

Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink FCRA Class Action: Quick Facts

Detail	Information
Case	Lydia Bultemeyer, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated v. CenturyLink, Inc.
Ninth Circuit Case No.	24-6413
District Court Case No.	2:14-cv-02530-SPL (D. Ariz.)
District Judge	Steven P. Logan
Ninth Circuit Panel	Judges Richard R. Clifton, Jay S. Bybee and Eric D. Miller
Defendant	CenturyLink, Inc. (now Lumen Technologies, Inc.)
Law at Issue	Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681b
Class Status	Certified class action
Jury Award	$28 million statutory + $112 million punitive = $140 million
Per Class Member	$500 statutory + $2,000 punitive
Ninth Circuit Decision	September 22, 2026 (per curiam opinion, two concurrences)
Result	District court judgment reversed; case remanded
CenturyLink Claim Form	None
Payment Deadline	None

What Did Lydia Bultemeyer Allege Against CenturyLink Under the FCRA?

Bultemeyer used CenturyLink’s website to order residential internet service. The online order had five steps. She entered her address and personal information, chose the services she wanted and checked the box accepting the terms. After step four, CenturyLink automatically pulled her credit report. Step five asked for payment information and let her submit the order. She decided not to place an order and never finished it.

She alleged that CenturyLink violated the FCRA by obtaining her consumer report without a permissible purpose. Her position was that she had not yet “initiated” a business transaction, which is what 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(a)(3)(F) requires.

CenturyLink disagreed. It argued that completing the first four steps was enough to initiate a transaction, and that it had a legitimate business need for the credit data, including accurate pricing and protection against fraud.

How Did Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink Reach a $140 Million Jury Verdict in Arizona?

Bultemeyer filed her complaint on November 14, 2014. The case did not go straight to trial. In December 2019, the Ninth Circuit reversed an earlier dismissal, ruling that she had alleged a concrete privacy injury and had standing to sue over an unauthorized credit pull.

The District of Arizona later certified a class of every individual in the United States about whom CenturyLink obtained a consumer credit report using personal information entered on its ecommerce website between November 14, 2012 and November 14, 2014, excluding anyone who had signed an arbitration agreement or class action waiver with CenturyLink. Notice of the certified class went out in January 2024.

At trial in September 2024, the jury found that CenturyLink pulled credit reports on the named plaintiff and every class member without a permissible purpose, and that the violation was willful. It awarded each class member $500 in statutory damages and $2,000 in punitive damages. Plaintiffs’ counsel put the class at just over 56,000 people, which is how the awards reach $28 million and $112 million, or $140 million in total. The district court entered judgment on September 16, 2024.

Plaintiffs’ counsel described it as believed to be the largest jury verdict in FCRA history.

Why Did the Ninth Circuit Reverse the CenturyLink FCRA Verdict? The Safeco Defense Explained

The FCRA allows statutory and punitive damages only for willful violations. Under Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (2007), a company that adopts an objectively reasonable reading of the statute did not act willfully, even if a court later decides the reading was wrong.

The Ninth Circuit applied that rule to CenturyLink for three reasons:

1. The FCRA does not define the word “initiated.”
2. No federal court of appeals had addressed when an online consumer initiates a business transaction.
3. A 1998 informal FTC staff opinion aimed at automobile sellers was not specific enough to warn CenturyLink away from its reading.

Because the willfulness finding was the basis for both the statutory and the punitive awards, the panel reversed the judgment and remanded.

Did the Ninth Circuit Decide When a Consumer Initiates an Online Transaction Under the FCRA?

No. The panel did not decide whether a consumer initiates an online transaction before clicking the final submit button. It held only that CenturyLink’s position was reasonable enough to defeat willfulness.

Two judges wrote separate concurrences:

• Judge Clifton said he would treat a consumer who completes all but the final step of a multi-step online purchase as having initiated the transaction.
• Judge Bybee said a consumer has not initiated the transaction until she knows the full cost, including any required deposit, and submits the order.

Those views are not the holding of the court. The binding ruling is the Safeco decision, and the meaning of “initiated” for online orders remains open for future FCRA cases.

Can Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink Class Members File a Claim for Part of the $140 Million?

No. A jury verdict is not a settlement, and this one has been reversed. Being in the certified class does not currently entitle anyone to a payment. Be careful with websites or emails offering to “file your CenturyLink claim” for a fee.

If you think a company pulled your credit report without your authorization, you can:

• Request your free reports at AnnualCreditReport.com and look for hard inquiries you do not recognize.
• Dispute any unfamiliar inquiry directly with Equifax, Experian or TransUnion.
• Talk to a consumer-rights attorney about an individual FCRA claim.

What Happens Next in Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink in the District of Arizona?

The case returns to Judge Steven P. Logan in the District of Arizona for further proceedings consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s opinion. Class counsel could ask for rehearing en banc or petition the Supreme Court, but no such request has been reported yet.

Class counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs was set aside by the district court until the appeal was resolved, so any fee question will depend on what happens on remand.

CenturyLink FCRA Class Action Key Dates

Date	Event
November 14, 2014	Bultemeyer files her FCRA complaint against CenturyLink in the District of Arizona
December 23, 2019	Ninth Circuit reverses the earlier dismissal, holding Bultemeyer had standing
February 2, 2023	District of Arizona certifies the class
January 5, 2024	Notice of the certified class action is published
September 13, 2024	Jury returns the $140 million verdict
September 16, 2024	District court enters judgment
October 16, 2024	CenturyLink asks for a new trial, arguing there was no evidence of willfulness
March 3, 2026	Ninth Circuit hears oral argument
September 22, 2026	Ninth Circuit reverses the judgment and remands

More FCRA Class Action Lawsuits on AllAboutLawyer

The CenturyLink case is one of several FCRA disputes we cover. These articles look at other credit-reporting and background-check claims:

• Experian Class Action Lawsuit: Latest Updates, Claims & How To File covers the CFPB’s FCRA suit and other claims against a major credit bureau.
• TruthFinder Class Action Lawsuit And FTC Settlement, Can You File A Claim? explains an FTC FCRA case with no consumer refund program.
• All Capital One Class Action Lawsuits 2026, Every Active Settlement, Claim Forms, And Deadlines includes an FCRA settlement over people wrongly reported as deceased.
• Walmart Class Action Lawsuit October Just Started Mailing Checks, Did You Miss The $45M Settlement Deadline? includes an FCRA background-check case against Walmart.

CenturyLink FCRA Class Action: Frequently Asked Questions

Did the Ninth Circuit reverse the $140 million CenturyLink FCRA verdict?

Yes. On September 22, 2026, the Ninth Circuit reversed the District of Arizona judgment in Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink, Inc., No. 24-6413, and remanded the case.

Why did the Ninth Circuit reverse the CenturyLink verdict under Safeco?

The panel found CenturyLink’s reading of “initiated” was not objectively unreasonable. The statute does not define the term, no appeals court had answered the question, and the FTC staff opinion was too general. Under Safeco, that defeats willful liability.

Did the Ninth Circuit rule that CenturyLink’s credit pulls complied with the FCRA?

No. The court did not decide whether Bultemeyer initiated a business transaction. It ruled only that CenturyLink’s position was reasonable enough to avoid willful liability.

Is Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink a certified class action?

Yes. The District of Arizona certified the class before trial, so it is a certified class action, not a putative one.

Who was in the CenturyLink FCRA class?

People in the United States whose credit reports CenturyLink obtained using information entered on its ecommerce website between November 14, 2012 and November 14, 2014, who had not signed an arbitration agreement or class action waiver.

Can CenturyLink class members claim money from the $140 million verdict?

No. The verdict was reversed, and there is no claim form, settlement fund or deadline.

Is there a CenturyLink or Lumen FCRA settlement?

No settlement has been announced. The Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the District of Arizona.

What happens next in Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink?

The case goes back to the District of Arizona. Class counsel may seek rehearing en banc or Supreme Court review, and any fee questions will be handled on remand.

Sources

1. Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink, Inc., No. 24-6413 (9th Cir. Sept. 22, 2026)
2. Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink, Inc., No. 17-15858 (9th Cir. Dec. 23, 2019)
3. Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink Inc., No. 2:14-cv-02530-SPL (D. Ariz.)
4. Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (2007)
5. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681b, 1681n
6. Notice of Class Action, Bultemeyer v. CenturyLink Inc. (PR Newswire, Jan. 5, 2024) and the case notice site, centurylinkclassaction.com
7. Thompson Consumer Law Group, “Jury Finds CenturyLink, Inc. Unlawfully Pulled Credit Reports on Class of Consumers Who Had Not Submitted Any Order”
8. Law360, “CenturyLink Seeks Erasure Of $140M Class Verdict” (Oct. 16, 2024) and “9th Circ. Wipes Out $140M Class Verdict Against CenturyLink” (Sept. 22, 2026)
9. Public Citizen Litigation Group, “Applying Safeco defense, Ninth Circuit splits on what it means to ‘initiate’ a business transaction under the FCRA”

Disclaimer

This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Israr Ahmad is a legal content researcher, not a practicing attorney, and reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. AllAboutLawyer.com is not affiliated with CenturyLink, Lumen Technologies, the class representative, class counsel or any court.

The information comes from court opinions, docket materials and public reporting, and litigation moves quickly. Rulings, deadlines and case status can change after publication, so check the court’s official records before relying on anything here. If you have questions about your own situation, talk to a licensed attorney.

Written by Israr Ahmad, Legal Content Researcher.