United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-2570 TAMARA S. FRAZIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 1:20-cv-06721 — Gary Feinerman, Judge. ____________________

ARGUED APRIL 19, 2023 — DECIDED JULY 5, 2023 ____________________

Before HAMILTON, BRENNAN, and KIRSCH, Circuit Judges. BRENNAN, Circuit Judge. Tamara Frazier sued credit data furnisher Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc. under 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act for allegedly providing inaccurate information after unreasonably investi- gating a dispute of its data. To prevail on this claim, Frazier must make a threshold showing that Dovenmuehle’s data was incomplete or inaccurate. That requirement can be 2 No. 22-2570 satisfied by demonstrating the data furnished was (1) patently incorrect, or (2) materially misleading, including by omission. Frazier contends that Dovenmuehle, upon notice of a data dispute, provided credit reporting agency Equifax with an in- accurate amended Pay Rate and Account History. For support she relies on evidence about persisting inaccuracies in Equifax’s credit reports produced using the amended data. But given the full record, no reasonable jury could find that Dovenmuehle provided patently incorrect or materially mis- leading information. So, we affirm summary judgment for the data furnisher. We also affirm the district court’s disposition of discovery and supplemental briefing motions for related reasons. I. Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc., a mortgage subservicer, helps lenders administer mortgage loans by accepting and keeping track of payments. It also furnishes payment data to credit reporting agencies like Equifax, Experian, or TransUn- ion. These credit reporting agencies in turn compile and process that consumer credit information to produce a credit report for end-users, such as banks and landlords. When a consumer notifies a credit reporting agency that information on a credit report is incorrect, the agency will identify the relevant data furnisher and transmit to it an Au- tomated Consumer Dispute Verification (ACDV) form. The ACDV form presents the furnisher with account payment data the credit reporting agency currently possesses and the relevant data items the consumer disputes. Upon notice of a dispute, the data furnisher has a statutory duty to investigate the disputed data. The furnisher must also correct or verify No. 22-2570 3 the information by returning the ACDV form to the credit re- porting agency with any amended or verified data inserted next to the old data. See generally 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b). In 2007, Tamara Frazier obtained a home mortgage loan for which Dovenmuehle served as subservicer. Beginning in October 2015, Frazier failed to make her monthly payments, and by January 2016, she was 90 days delinquent. To resolve the delinquency, Frazier successfully negotiated and settled her debt through a short sale of her home, which closed on January 14, 2016. Sometime in 2019 and 2020, Frazier realized this closed mortgage account was reported as delinquent on her credit reports, so she disputed the information to several credit re- porting agencies, including Equifax. To confirm the accuracy of its records on Frazier’s mortgage, Equifax sent Dovenmuehle four ACDV forms between 2019 and 2020. In its ACDV responses, Dovenmuehle amended or verified the following data items, among others. The contested it