Chaikin v. TransUnion, LLC

Background

Owen Chaikin’s complaint names TransUnion, LLC; Equifax Information Services LLC; Experian Information Solutions, Inc.; and Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation as defendants. The motion papers state that Chaikin asserted claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act based on allegedly inaccurate information concerning an account connected to a 2015 Nissan Murano lease. The motion papers further state that the lease was assigned to Nissan Motor Acceptance Company LLC, which referred to itself as NMAC.

NMAC relied on an arbitration clause in the lease. According to the motion papers, the clause covered disputes arising from or relating to the credit application, lease, vehicle, resulting transaction, or relationship, and provided for individual arbitration. NMAC argued that the clause was a valid and enforceable agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act and that it covered Chaikin’s claims against NMAC.

Motion and ruling

NMAC moved to compel Chaikin to arbitrate his claims and to stay the litigation concerning NMAC pending arbitration. The court’s March 26, 2025 order states: “Defendant Nissan Motor Acceptance Company’s motion to compel arbitration and stay is DENIED without prejudice to renew on the reply date May 1, 2025.” The order also states that the motion was filed prematurely, directs NMAC to refer to the court’s earlier order at ECF No. 46, and directs the clerk to terminate the motion at ECF No. 47.

What the order decided

The order resolved only the pending motion as stated above. It did not determine the merits of Chaikin’s Fair Credit Reporting Act claims, decide whether the arbitration clause is ultimately enforceable or applies to those claims, or order the parties into arbitration. The phrase “without prejudice” appears in the court’s order and permits the motion to be renewed; the order specifically identifies May 1, 2025 as the reply date for renewal.