Kistler et al. v. Eightfold AI Inc. — applicant scores and consumer reports
AI candidate ranking / FCRA and California consumer reporting · California case
Two applicants allege that Eightfold’s candidate profiles and scores are consumer reports subject to federal and California disclosure requirements. These are the plaintiffs’ allegations, not established findings.
The court filed an order on July 24, 2026 vacating the August 4 dismissal hearing. The reviewed sources do not establish a later merits disposition; a current docket check is needed before publication.
Case timeline
- · Ruling
Order filed vacating the August 4 hearing; the order permits a later hearing or a written decision.
Source document - · Filing
Applicants file a proposed class-action complaint in Contra Costa County Superior Court.
Source document
What the applicants allege
The complaint challenges applicant profiling and scoring under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and California consumer-reporting law. Whether the challenged outputs legally qualify as consumer reports is disputed.
Verification limit
The federal case follows a California state filing. The hearing-vacating order was filed July 24 but bears a July 27 date in its signature block. This entry uses the filing date. No later outcome has been verified from the reviewed documents.
