King v. Equifax Information Services, LLC

Background

Aaron King, who represented himself, sued Equifax Information Services, LLC, Trans Union, LLC, Experian Information Solutions, Inc., and LexisNexis Risk Solutions. The case concerned allegations that the defendants associated King’s consumer and credit information with information belonging to another person with the same name. King alleged that this association led to debt-collection efforts against him.

Earlier orders dismissed all claims against Equifax and denied King permission to amend his complaint as to Equifax. King’s proposed amended complaint asserted claims under Section 1681e of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, common-law fraud, an alleged breach of a 2008 settlement, and defamation. The court later denied those claims against Equifax, and also denied King’s request for reconsideration. The opinion states that only a narrow set of claims against Trans Union remained.

Equifax’s Motion

Equifax moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) for entry of judgment. Rule 54(b) permits a court in a case involving multiple claims or parties to direct entry of a final judgment as to fewer than all claims or parties if the court expressly finds no just reason for delay.

The court first examined whether the earlier orders were, in substance, already a final judgment against Equifax. It concluded that they were. The court relied on the dismissal of the claims, the denial of leave to amend because the proposed claims were futile, and the denial of reconsideration. Together, those rulings finally resolved the claims against Equifax.

The court then considered whether there was any just reason to delay formal judgment. It agreed with Equifax that the claims against Equifax were distinguishable from the remaining claims against Trans Union and that no claims against Equifax were pending. The court therefore granted Equifax’s motion for entry of judgment.

Request for Further Reconsideration

In opposing Equifax’s motion, King argued that his second amended complaint should not have been denied. He asserted that evidence unavailable to him earlier might have changed the court’s prior ruling and asked for permission to file another motion for reconsideration. The court stated that it had already reviewed the second amended complaint twice and denied the request to file another reconsideration motion.

Disposition

The court granted Equifax’s motion for entry of judgment. It also denied King’s request to file another motion for reconsideration. The order did not resolve the claims that remained against Trans Union.