SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Osita Emmanuel Ok-ocha, an attorney proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment, dismissing his complaint alleging various violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and New York law. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review orders granting summary judgment de novo and focus on whether the district court properly concluded that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P., 321 F.3d 292, 300 (2d Cir. 2003). In determining whether there are genuine issues of material fact, we are “required to resolve all ambiguities and draw all permissible factual inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought.” Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128, 137 (2d Cir. 2003) (internal quotations omitted). Summary judgment is appropriate “[wjhere the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the non-moving party.” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986).

Upon such review, we conclude that Ok-ocha’s appeal is without merit substantially for the reasons articulated by the district court in its well-reasoned order. Okocha v. Trans Union LLC, No. 08-cv-3107, 2011 WL 2837594 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2011). We have considered all of Okocha’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.