That is not the correct form of a syllogism. The second premise should be "Some C are A" leading to the conclusion "Some C are B". With the structure you provided, it is easy to produce invalid conclusions from true premises:
- All planets are round
- Some fruits are round
- Therefore: Some fruits are planets
Whereas a correctly structured syllogism might be:
- All coconuts are round
- Some fruits are coconuts
- Therefore: Some fruits are round
For more context, this is in part the result of a 2021 settlement with the state of Washington over them doing the opposite: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/27/1040968238/greyhound-warrantless-searches-lawsuit-settlement
The settlement only forces this behavior in Washington though, so good on Greyhound for deciding that it is the right policy everywhere.