Norman v. Trans Union LLC

Background

Ruth Noemi Norman filed the action without a lawyer. The order addresses Trans Union LLC’s motion to dismiss her Second Amended Complaint. The court treated that complaint as asserting two categories of claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act: claims that Trans Union failed to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of information in her credit reports under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i, and claims that Trans Union failed to comply with the Act’s reinvestigation requirements under 15 U.S.C. § 1681i.

A magistrate judge recommended granting Trans Union’s motion in full and dismissing both categories of claims with prejudice. Norman did not submit an objection within the applicable seventeen-day period. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Court’s Analysis

The court agreed that Norman’s accuracy claims were deficient because the Second Amended Complaint did not allege that the information in her credit reports was inaccurate. The court explained that in claims under sections 1681e and 1681i, whether the disputed credit information is inaccurate is a threshold issue.

The court also agreed that Norman had not adequately pleaded a violation of the reinvestigation requirements. The complaint did not allege facts showing that Trans Union failed to follow reasonable reinvestigation procedures. The court noted that Norman’s submissions instead indicated that Trans Union conducted reinvestigations and removed some of the items she challenged from her credit report.

Disposition

The court stated that Norman had received multiple opportunities to plead her claims and had benefited from the court’s analysis of an earlier motion to dismiss. Because she gave no indication that a third opportunity to amend could cure the deficiencies, the court dismissed her Fair Credit Reporting Act claims with prejudice and without leave to amend.

Judge Gregory H. Woods accepted and adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation in its entirety and granted Trans Union’s motion to dismiss. The clerk was directed to enter judgment in favor of Trans Union, terminate all pending motions, adjourn remaining dates, and close the case.