Bank of America said consumers who accuse the bank of opening unauthorized credit card accounts in their names should not be allowed to amend their complaint to fix the issues a North Carolina federal court found with their Fair Credit Reporting Act claims, saying the suit's same pleading defects would remain.

In the motion filed Monday, Bank of America called the plaintiffs' amendment attempt "futile" and said it would not survive a motion to dismiss.

"The court previously dismissed plaintiffs' Fair Credit Reporting Act claim with prejudice for failure to allege that Bank of America 'used or obtained' their consumer reports," the motion said. "Having thus disposed of the FCRA claim, the court did not address the other FCRA elements, which were similarly deficient."

The suit was launched in 2023 after Bank of America signed a consent order with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to resolve allegations involving the bank's credit card rewards and overdraft policies.

But the plaintiffs do not show that the credit card openings were part of the incentive program identified in the consent order, the bank said Monday.

Nadine Ballard sued on behalf of a proposed class of consumers who said they unknowingly had credit card accounts opened in their names between 2012 and 2022, which allegedly resulted in penalties for unpaid fees and affected their credit scores.

The accounts were opened by employees desperate to reach "unrealistic sales quotas" as part of a money-grabbing scheme by the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank, the suit said.

The plaintiffs said in their motion filed last month that their proposal to amend the suit would not prejudice Bank of America in any way since no new legal theory is being advanced and discovery has not started.

The proposed new complaint identifies the contents of credit reports that Bank of America received from credit reporting agencies and identifies the agencies, the plaintiffs said.

But the bank said Monday that the proposed amendments to the suit still do not plausibly allege the FCRA's elements regarding permissible use or willful or negligent noncompliance.

"The allegations that the bank used and obtained the credit card plaintiffs' credit reports 'without [their] knowledge or consent to open an unauthorized account' are insufficient," Bank of America said.

"As explained in the bank's [motion to dismiss], the FCRA recognizes several instances allowing a defendant to obtain a consumer's credit report without their knowledge, including when the defendant has reason to believe it is engaging in a credit transaction involving the consumer plaintiff," the bank said.

Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday.

The plaintiffs are represented by Gary W. Jackson and Thomas M. Wilmoth of the Law Offices of James Scott Farrin, Lesley E. Weaver, Anne K. Davis, Joshua D. Samra and Gregory S. Mullens of Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP, Hassan Zavareei, Andrea R. Gold, Gemma Seidita and Cort Carlson of Tycko & Zavareei LLP, Daniel E. Gustafson, Abou B. Amara Jr. and Lydia E. Lockwood of Gustafson Gluek PLLC, Jennifer S. Czeisler of Sterlington PLLC and Charles E. Schaffer and Daniel C. Levin of Levin Sedran & Berman LLP.

Bank of America is represented by Amanda L. Groves and Elizabeth J. Ireland of Winston & Strawn LLP.

The case is In re: Bank of America Unauthorized Account Opening Litigation, case number 3:23-cv-00422, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina.