Terrie Money v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al
Filing
36
ORDER GRANTING 12 DEFENDANT CAPITAL ONE'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 1/13/2016. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/13/2016)
1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
SAN JOSE DIVISION
5
6
TERRIE MONEY,
Case No. 15-cv-04614-BLF
Plaintiff,
7
v.
8
9
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC., et al.,
Defendants.
10
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT
CAPITAL ONE’S MOTION TO
DISMISS THE COMPLAINT WITH
LEAVE TO AMEND
[RE: ECF 12]
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
Defendant Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. (“Capital One”) moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s
12
13
complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated on the record at
14
the hearing on January 7, 2016 and discussed below, the motion is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO
15
AMEND.
16
I.
BACKGROUND
17
Plaintiff has filed a form complaint containing boilerplate allegations arising from
18
unspecified inaccuracies in her credit reports. Plaintiff claims that she gave the defendant credit
19
reporting agencies notice of the inaccuracies, but they and the entities that furnished the inaccurate
20
information failed to perform reasonable investigations or correct the inaccuracies. Plaintiff
21
asserts a single claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2.
22
II.
DISCUSSION
23
Plaintiff’s complaint fails to meet the most basic pleading requirements. Federal Rule of
24
Civil Procedure 8(a) requires that the complaint contain “a short and plain statement of the claim
25
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Federal Rule of Civil
26
Procedure 12(b)(6) requires that the complaint “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true,
27
to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)
28
(quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial plausibility
1
when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
2
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. As discussed in more detail below,
3
Plaintiff does not identify with any particularity what inaccurate information appeared on the
4
credit reports. Thus the complaint does not contain facts sufficient to put Capital One on notice of
5
the claims against it or to show that Plaintiff is entitled to relief.
Claim 1 is asserted under the FCRA, which is titled “Responsibilities of furnishers of
6
information to consumer reporting agencies.” 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2. Section 1681s-2(a) does not
8
provide a private right of action, so to the extent that Plaintiff asserts a claim under that section, it
9
is subject to dismissal. See Nelson v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp., 282 F.3d 1057, 1059-60
10
(9th Cir. 2002). The FCRA does provide a private right of action under § 1681s-2(b) against a
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
7
person who furnishes information to a credit reporting agency but fails to take certain steps when
12
informed of a dispute regarding the completeness or accuracy of such information. See id. at
13
1060; Littleton v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 15-cv-01619-EJD, 2015 WL 4638308, at *1 (N.D.
14
Cal. Aug. 4, 2015). A plaintiff asserting a claim under § 1681s-2(b) must allege what information
15
the defendant furnished to the credit reporting agency and why that information was incomplete or
16
inaccurate. See Littleton, 2015 WL 4638308, at *2. Plaintiff has not alleged what information
17
Capital One communicated to the defendant credit reporting agencies or why such information
18
was incomplete or inaccurate.
19
III.
ORDER
20
(1)
Capital One’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND;
21
(2)
Leave to amend is limited to the claim addressed in this order; Plaintiff may not
add additional claims or parties without express leave of the Court; and
22
23
(3)
Any amended pleading shall be filed on or before February 3, 2016.
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 13, 2016
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?