Must Real Page, Inc. in interests of national security define itself as a Consumer Reporting Agency (CRA) and be responsible in that number under Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) if the 15USC §§1681a(f), 1681a(p), 1681a(u) RESELLER and the different trials have already defined it as a CRA?

QUESTION PRESENTED The rareness of the FCRA cases in the U.S. Supreme Court is conditioned by the , myth of “Conduit function” the Federal Trade Commission generously gives out as an indulgence to the future sin to such mighty persons as the founder of RealPage. Inc. Mr. Stephen T. Winn. The consequences bleed. (See please an extract from Real Page’s “Motion to Dismiss” and BBB’s Reviews & Complaints, App. 13, 20). The rareness comes because to sue an offender from another state is a very uncomfortable deal while to sue him at home in federal court is impossible because of such myth. But! this myth a is a trick. Leaving behind itself a multitude of victims, the software company Real Page, Inc. (RP,) escapes unhurt for many years due to this trickery. Can it really be true that . nobody can stop it? é The question is: Must Real Page, Inc..in interests of national security define itself as a Consumer Reporting Agency (CRA) and be responsible in that number under Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) if the 1SUSC §8§1681 a(f), 1681 a(p), 1681a (u) . RESELLER and the different trials have already defined it as a CRA? (App. 14, 15,16) .