Wingo, Jr. v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 34

ORDER Adopting 32 Report and Recommendation and Denying 23 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (KWin)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION
JERRY WINGO, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 17-cv-11275
Honorable Thomas L. Ludington
Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.,
et al,
Defendants.
__________________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING MOTION
TO DISMISS
On April 20, 2017, Plaintiff Jerry Wingo, Jr., filed a complaint in the 21st District Court
of Wayne County. ECF No. In the complaint, Wingo named Experian Information Solutions,
Inc., Trans Union, LLC, and North Central Area Credit Union as Defendants. Wingo alleges that
Defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act. On April 24, 2017, Defendants removed the
suit to the Southern Division of the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
ECF No. 1. Defendant North Central Area Credit Union then filed a counterclaim against Wingo,
alleging that Wingo failed to make payments on a loan and then did not produce the snowmobile
collateral after defaulting. ECF No. 15. On May 9, 2017, the suit was reassigned from the
Southern Division to the Northern Division because the Northern Division is the proper venue.
ECF No. 17. Subsequently, all pretrial matters were referred to Magistrate Judge Patricia T.
Morris. ECF No. 20. On May 26, 2017, Wingo filed a motion to dismiss North Central Area
Credit Union’s counter claim. ECF No. 23.

On August 9, 2017, Judge Morris issued a report recommending that Wingo’s motion to
dismiss be denied. Although Wingo asserted that the Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to
review the counterclaim, Judge Morris explained that the counterclaim was covered by the
Court’s supplemental jurisdiction because it was related to the same fact-pattern as Plaintiff’s
(federal) claims.
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. Because this Court has supplemental
jurisdiction to review the counterclaim, Wingo’s motion to dismiss will be denied.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation,
ECF No. 32, is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss, ECF No. 23, is DENIED.

Dated: August 30, 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 August 30, 2017.
s/Kelly Winslow
KELLY WINSLOW, Case Manager

-2-