Yeska v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al
ORDER Adopting 40 Report and Recommendation, Granting 16 Motion to Dismiss, Dismissing Counts V and VI of Plaintiff's Complaint, and Dismissing Defendant Access Group. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (Sian, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case No. 16-cv-12395
Honorable Thomas L. Ludington
Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris
SOLUTIONS, INC., et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING MOTION TO
DISMISS, DISMISSING COUNTS V AND VI OF PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT, AND
DISMISSING DEFENDANT ACCESS GROUP
On June 24, 2016, Defendant Trans Union removed this case from the 70-1st Division
District Court for Saginaw County, Michigan. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff Yeska’s complaint alleges
violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act related to certain “trade lines” that Yeska opened in
order to pay for college. Yeska admits that he never made any payments on the lines, but
disputes the reporting of those trade lines on his credit reports. All pretrial matters were referred
to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris. ECF No. 6. Although only Trans Union was served prior
to removal, the other Defendants were subsequently served. On July 18, 2016, Defendant Access
Group filed a motion to dismiss. ECF No. 16. In the motion, Access Group argues that Yeska
lacks standing and has failed to state a claim as regards the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Access
Group requests that Counts V and VI of Yeska’s complaint be dismissed.
On December 21, 2016, Judge Morris issued a report recommending that Access Group’s
motion to dismiss be granted and that Counts V and VI of Plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed
with prejudice. ECF No. 40. In the report, Judge Morris finds that Yeska has standing to bring
this suit, but that Yeska does not state a claim against Access Group under the Fair Credit
Reporting Act. The report explains that Yeska did not adequately allege that Access Group
received notice that the credit information was disputed. Likewise, Yeska did not sufficiently
allege damages. For those reasons, Judge Morris recommends that Access Group’s motion to
dismiss be granted and Counts V and VI of the complaint be dismissed.
Counts V and VI of Yeska’s complaint are the only claims against Defendant Access
Group. Thus, all claims against Access Group will be dismissed with prejudice. Access Group
will be dismissed from this suit.
Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may
object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report,
neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record.
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and
recommendation waives any further right to appeal.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation,
ECF No. 40, is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that Defendant Access Group’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 16,
It is further ORDERED that Counts V and VI of Plaintiff Yeska’s Complaint, ECF No.
1, are DISMISSED with prejudice.
It is further ORDERED that Defendant Access Group is DISMISSED.
Dated: January 10, 2017
s/Thomas L. Ludington
THOMAS L. LUDINGTON
United States District Judge
PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served
upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first
class U.S. mail on January 10, 2017.
s/Michael A. Sian
MICHAEL A. SIAN, Case Manager
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?