Housen v. Experian Inc.

Background

Durey Damion Housen brought claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act against Experian, Inc. and Jeff Shotts. The defendants’ letter states that Housen alleged Experian inaccurately reported derogatory information and failed to reasonably investigate disputes about information on his credit report. The letter also states that Housen proceeded without a lawyer.

The defendants argued that Housen’s claims against Shotts should be dismissed because he was not alleged to be a consumer reporting agency and because the complaint did not allege that he personally caused the claimed violations. They also argued that the claims against Experian were inadequately pleaded because Housen did not identify the alleged inaccuracies or explain why Experian’s investigations were unreasonable. The defendants further argued that Experian accurately reported two accounts as charged off and that Housen’s theory concerning debt as income could not support a Fair Credit Reporting Act claim.

What the Court Decided

The court did not rule on the anticipated motion to dismiss or decide whether Housen’s Fair Credit Reporting Act claims were legally sufficient. Instead, the court considered the defendants’ request for a pre-motion conference.

Order

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the defendants’ application for a pre-motion conference. The court converted the initial pretrial conference scheduled for October 24, 2024, into a pre-motion conference and provided instructions for joining by telephone. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 14. The opinion text does not state that the complaint was dismissed.