King v. Corelogic Credco, LLC
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 6/12/2018. (jsmi, ) [Transferred from Virginia Eastern on 6/14/2018.]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
SHAKEENA KING, on behalf
ofherselfand a class ofsimilarly situated
individuals^
Plaintiff,
V.
Civil Action No. 3:17cv761
CORELOGIC CREDCO, LLC,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Corelogic Credco, LLC's
("Corelogic") Motion to Transfer Venue to the SouthernDistrict of California(the "Motion to
Transfer"). (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff Shakeena King responded, and Corelogic replied. (ECF
Nos. 11,12.) Accordingly, the matter is ripe for disposition. The Court dispenses with oral
argumentbecause the materials before it adequately present the facts and legal contentions, and
argumentwould not aid the decisional process. The Court exercisesjurisdiction pursuantto
28 U.S.C. § 1331.' For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the Motion to Transfer.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
A.
Factual Background
Corelogic is a California limited liability company that conducts business as a consumer
reporting agency and "reseller" of consumer reports. (Compl. 19, ECF No. 1.) As a reseller of
' "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the
Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 1331. King alleges a violation
of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, etseq., (the "FCRA").
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?