Abdul Wasi v. Equifax
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-01037
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Fahiym Abdul Wasi v. Equifax, Judge Swain transferred the credit-reporting case to the Eastern District of New York.
Fahiym Abdul Wasi's action against Equifax was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. The transferee court was left to decide whether Wasi could proceed without prepaying fees; the Southern District denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
Fahiym Abdul Wasi sued Equifax under federal credit-reporting and consumer-protection laws. He alleged that information removed from his consumer credit report was later added back. He also asserted diversity jurisdiction.
The court found that the Eastern District of New York was a proper venue because Wasi resides in Kings County, where events related to his claims could have occurred. The court also noted that Wasi had a related pending action against Equifax in that district.
Judge Swain ordered the Clerk to transfer this action to the Eastern District of New York under the federal transfer statute. The order closed the case in the Southern District of New York, and the court denied fee-free status for any appeal because it found an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Abdul Wasi v. Equifax · No. 1:22-cv-01037
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 8, 2022
Background
Fahiym Abdul Wasi, representing himself, brought claims against Equifax under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Consumer Credit Protection Act. He also invoked diversity jurisdiction. Wasi alleged that he notified Equifax about information on his consumer credit report, that the information was removed on October 14, 2021, and that it was added back on December 14, 2021.
Venue analysis
The court explained that federal law permits a civil action to be brought in a district where a substantial part of the events occurred or, in some circumstances, where the defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction. Wasi resides in Brooklyn, in Kings County, which is within the Eastern District of New York. Because the events underlying his claims could be said to have occurred there, the court concluded that venue was proper in the Eastern District of New York.
The court noted that Wasi had not alleged facts about Equifax's contacts with the Southern District of New York, although Equifax likely was subject to personal jurisdiction there. The court also noted that Wasi had recently brought a related action against Equifax that had been transferred to the Eastern District of New York and remained pending there under docket number 21-CV-6638.
Transfer decision
Even assuming that venue in the Southern District of New York was proper, the court considered whether transfer would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interest of justice under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). It found transfer appropriate because the underlying events occurred in Kings County, Wasi resides there, his choice of the Southern District received less weight because he did not reside there and the events did not occur there, and a related action against Equifax was already pending in the Eastern District of New York.
Judge Swain ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The order stated that the transferee court would decide whether Wasi could continue without prepaying fees, directed that no summons issue from the Southern District, and closed the case in that district. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
What the order did not decide
The court did not decide whether Equifax violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act or the Consumer Credit Protection Act. It ruled only on where the case should proceed.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.