Simon v. Trans Union, LLC
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, The Court GRANTS TransUnion's motion for judgment on the pleadings. (Doc. 12 .) The Court DISMISSES this case with prejudice and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 2/12/2018. (jdh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
DEANDRE Q. SIMON,
Case No. 3:17-cv-00902-JPG-RJD
TRANS UNION, LLC,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on defendant Trans Union, LLC’s (“TransUnion’s”)
motion for judgment on the pleadings. (Doc. 12.) Plaintiff Deandre Simon did not respond to
TransUnion’s motion. In short, TransUnion asks the Court to grant judgment in their favor
because Simon has not—and cannot—allege a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. For the
following reasons, the Court GRANTS TransUnion’s motion.
Deandre Simon is an inmate at Centralia Correctional Center. (Compl. ¶ 2, Doc. 1-3.) He
alleges that he sent four letters directly to TransUnion—dated in February, May, and June
2017—in which he requested a free copy of his credit report pursuant to the Fair Credit
Reporting Act. (Id. at ¶ 4–9.) Simon argues that since TransUnion refused to send him a free
copy in response, he is entitled to actual, statutory, and punitive damages—in part because he
alleges TransUnion caused him “humiliation, embarrassment, mental distress, and anguish”. (Id.
at ¶ 13–14.) Simon filed his complaint in Illinois state court, but TransUnion removed the case to
this Court on the basis of federal question jurisdiction. (Notice of Removal, Doc. 1.) This case is
but one in a bundle of cases that Illinois state prisoners have recently filed, all with curious
similarities between them.
Judgment on the Pleadings
A motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(c) is governed by the same standards as a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a
claim: the pleadings must plausibly suggest that the plaintiff has a right to relief above a
speculative level. Adams v. City of Indianapolis, 742 F.3d 720, 727–28 (7th Cir. 2014) (citing
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009)). In ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the Court considers the complaint,
answer, and any written instruments attached to those pleadings; accepts all well-pleaded
allegations in the complaint as true; and draws all inferences in favor of the plaintiff. See
Pisciotta v. Old Nat’l Bancorp, 499 F.3d 629, 633 (7th Cir. 2007); Forseth v. Village of Sussex,
199 F.3d 363, 368 (7th Cir. 2000).
The Fair Credit Reporting Act
The Fair Credit Reporting Act commands that once per year, if a consumer requests a
free copy of their credit report, all consumer reporting agencies—such as TransUnion—must
provide the free copy to the consumer. 15 U.S.C. § 1681j(a)(1)(A). The consumer must,
however, request the copy from the “central source established for such purpose”. 15 U.S.C. §
1681j(a)(1)(B). The upshot of the statute’s design is that consumers can obtain their free credit
reports from all of the agencies by making only a single request through the central source,
rather than having to contact each agency individually. 12 C.F.R. § 1022.136(a). If a consumer
reporting agency fails to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the statute allows plaintiffs
to recover damages from the agency on theories of both willful noncompliance and negligent
noncompliance. 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(1)(A); 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(1)(2).
Here, TransUnion has not violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act. This is because Simon
did not request his credit report from the central source, as § 1681j(a)(1)(B) requires. Rather,
Simon sent his requests directly to TransUnion. (Compl. Ex.’s A, C, E, & F, Doc. 1-3.)
Accordingly, TransUnion’s refusal to disclose Simon’s credit report was the proper application
of the statute. Simon also makes a stink about TransUnion asking for proper identification from
Simon before mailing him copies of confidential information, but the statute requires
TransUnion to obtain this identification before sending out such material. 15 U.S.C.A. §
1681h(a)(1). Simon’s complaint thus fails to plead any violation of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act—whether his theory is one of willful noncompliance, negligent compliance, or otherwise.
Moreover, it would be futile for the Court to allow Simon to amend his complaint because he has
already demonstrated through his attached exhibits that he is not entitled to relief.
This case mirrors a case in the Northern District of Illinois, where the Court summed up
the issue by stating: “while [the consumer credit agency] might have made greater effort to
accommodate Plaintiff's special circumstances [as a prisoner], the facts do not reflect a violation
of any provision of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.” Garland v. Equifax, et al., No. 3:15-cv50305, ECF No. 104 at 3 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 27, 2017). If prisoners wish to obtain free copies of their
credit reports pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, they are—at this time, at least—bound
by the terms of the statute.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS TransUnion’s motion for judgment on the
pleadings. (Doc. 12.) The Court DISMISSES this case with prejudice and DIRECTS the Clerk
of Court to enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: FEBRUARY 12, 2018
s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
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?