Brady et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 3

ORDERED the # 1 IFP Application is GRANTED. Clerk shall FILE the # 1 -1 Complaint. The Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Amended complaint due by 9/24/2014; entitled "AMENDED COMPLAINT", with case number above. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 8/25/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7

STEVEN J. BRADY,
ELENA M. BRADY,

ORDER
Plaintiffs,

8
9
10
11

v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA.,
WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE,
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY,
Defendants.

12
13
14

3:14-cv-00440-RCJ-WGC

Before the court are Plaintiffs' Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Doc. # 1)1 and
pro se Complaint (Doc. # 1-1).
I. APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

15
16

A person may be granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis if the person "submits

17

an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses [and] that the person is

18

unable to pay such fees or give security therefor. Such affidavit shall state the nature of the

19

action, defense or appeal and affiant's belief that the person is entitled to redress." 28 U.S.C.

20

§ 1915; Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (stating that this provision

21

applies to all actions filed in forma pauperis, not just prisoner actions).

22

In addition, the Local Rules of Practice for the District of Nevada provide: "Any person,

23

who is unable to prepay the fees in a civil case, may apply to the Court for authority to proceed

24

in forma pauperis. The application shall be made on the form provided by the Court and shall

25

include a financial affidavit disclosing the applicant's income, assets, expenses, and liabilities."

26

LSR 1-1.

27

"'[T]he supporting affidavits [must] state the facts as to [the] affiant's poverty with some

28
1

Refers to court's docket number.

1

particularity, definiteness and certainty.'" U.S. v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir. 1981)

2

(quoting Jefferson v. United States, 277 F.2d 823, 725 (9th Cir. 1960)). A litigant need not "be

3

absolutely destitute to enjoy the benefits of the statute." Adkins v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours &

4

Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339 (1948).

5
6

The court has reviewed Plaintiffs' application and it appears they are unable to pay the
filing fee; therefore, their application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 1) is granted.
II. SCREENING

7
8

A. Standard

9

28 U.S.C. § 1915 provides: "the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court

10

determines that...the action or appeal (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim upon

11

which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune

12

from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii). This provision applies to all actions filed in

13

forma pauperis, whether or not the plaintiff is incarcerated. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,

14

1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc); see also Calhoun v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (per

15

curiam).

16

Dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted is

17

provided for in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and this court applies the same

18

standard under Section 1915(e)(2)(B) when reviewing the adequacy of the complaint or amended

19

complaint. See Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). Review

20

under 12(b)(6) is essentially a ruling on a question of law. See Chappel v. Lab. Corp. of America,

21

232 F.3d 719, 723 (9th Cir. 2000).

22

In reviewing the complaint under this standard, the court must accept as true the

23

allegations of the complaint, Hosp. Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hosp., 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976),

24

construe the pleadings in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in the

25

plaintiff's favor, Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). Allegations in pro se

26

complaints are held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, and

27

must be liberally construed. See Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9 (1980); Haines v. Kerner, 404

28

U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972) (per curiam); Hamilton v. Brown, 630 F.3d 889, 893 (9th Cir. 2011).

-2-

1

A complaint must contain more than a "formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of

2

action," it must contain factual allegations sufficient to "raise a right to relief above the

3

speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). "The pleading

4

must contain something more...than...a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion [of] a

5

legally cognizable right of action." Id. (quoting 5 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and

6

Procedure § 1216, at 235-36 (3d ed. 2004)). At a minimum, a plaintiff should state "enough

7

facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 570; see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

8

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

9

A dismissal should not be without leave to amend unless it is clear from the face of the

10

complaint that the action is frivolous and could not be amended to state a federal claim, or the

11

district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action. See Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d

12

1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissed as frivolous); O'Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th

13

Cir. 1990).

14

B. Plaintiffs' Complaint

15

1. General Allegations

16

Plaintiffs bring this action against defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo

17

Home Mortgage, and Wells Fargo & Company (collectively, Wells Fargo), asserting violations

18

of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681, and the Fair Debt Collection

19

Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692. (Doc. # 1-1.) They also assert state law tort claims for

20

invasion of privacy and negligent hiring and supervision. (Id.)

21

Plaintiffs assert that they bring this action regarding Wells Fargo's continued attempts to

22

collect an alleged debt from Plaintiffs that Wells Fargo claims it is owed. (Doc. # 1-1 at 2 ¶ 5.)

23

They contend that on June 26, 2014, they received a "dunning notice" from Wells Fargo's

24

servicer which makes various claims by Wells Fargo regarding an alleged loan. (Id. ¶6.) This

25

notice is attached as Exhibit A to the complaint. (Doc. # 1-1 at 9-12.) Plaintiffs contend that on

26

June 30, 2014 and July 20, 2014, Plaintiffs served a Notice for Validation of Debt pursuant to the

27

FDCPA, which required Wells Fargo, the "debt collectors" to validate/verify the alleged debt

28

pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692g. (Id. at 2 ¶ 7.)

-3-

1

Plaintiffs claim that they received a response through Wells Fargo's servicer on July 23,

2

2014, that included a copy of an alleged Adjustable Rate Mortgage Note executed with World

3

Savings Bank, FSB; however, the documentation did not identify Wells Fargo and Wells Fargo

4

did not otherwise validate that Plaintiffs owe any debt to Wells Fargo. (Id. ¶ 8.)

5

Plaintiffs aver that on August 19, 2014, they obtained a consumer credit report from

6

consumer credit reporting agencies Equifax and Transunion, and discovered that Wells Fargo

7

was reporting the alleged debt to the consumer credit reporting agencies. (Id. ¶ 9.) They claim to

8

have suffered economic harm as a result of the erroneous credit reporting and failure to validate

9

the debt. (Id. ¶ 10.)

10

Plaintiffs also include the following allegation: "The above detailed conduct by the

11

Defendant(s) has more to do with their deceptive and illegal acts in their attempt to collect the

12

alleged debt, as opposed to any legitimacy of their alleged debt. The FDCPA, FCRA, relates to

13

the Defendant(s) even if they were collecting a legitimate debt." (Id. ¶ 11.)

14
15

2. FCRA Claim
a. Allegations

16

Plaintiffs claim that Wells Fargo is a "credit furnisher" as that term is defined by the

17

FCRA, and that the FCRA, and specifically 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a), prohibits furnishers from

18

reporting inaccurate or erroneous information about consumers, and places an affirmative duty

19

on furnishers to correct and update information they know, or reasonably should know is

20

inaccurate. (Id. at 3 ¶ 15.) The FCRA further requires furnishers to flag or otherwise provide

21

notice to credit reporting agencies of any dispute by a consumer related to his or her credit

22

information or history. (Id.) 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) imposes additional obligations on credit

23

furnishers which are triggered once a credit reporting agency (CRA) notifies the furnisher it has

24

received a notice of dispute from a consumer under 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a)(2). (Id. ¶ 16.) The

25

CRA is required to forward a consumer dispute verification form to the furnisher, and the

26

furnisher is then required to verify the credit information and investigate its accuracy. (Id.) The

27

furnisher is likewise required to: (a) conduct an investigation regarding the disputed information;

28

(b) review all relevant information provided by the CRA; (c) report the results of the

-4-

1

investigation back to the CRA; (d) if the investigation finds the existing information is

2

incomplete or inaccurate, to report back those results to the CRAs to whom the furnisher

3

originally communicated the information about the consumer; and (e) to modify, delete, or

4

permanently block the reporting of any item of information that is inaccurate, incomplete or

5

which cannot be verified as accurate after a reinvestigation. (Id., citing 15 U.S.C.

6

§ 1681s-2(b)(1).)

7

Plaintiffs state that these duties are triggered when a furnisher receives notice of a dispute

8

from a CRA, and that notice of a dispute that comes to a furnisher directly from a consumer does

9

not trigger the duty to reinvestigate. (Id. ¶ 17.) Instead, the consumer must send notice of the

10

dispute to the CRA, who in turn forwards the dispute to the furnisher. (Id.) Only then is the duty

11

to investigate on the part of the furnisher triggered. (Id.) Plaintiffs therefore acknowledge that if

12

a consumer sends notice of a dispute directly to the furnisher, the furnisher need not honor it

13

(although they claim that direct notice of a dispute to the furnisher "likely" creates a legal

14

obligation under § 1692g of the FDCPA). (Id.)

15

Plaintiffs then claim that Wells Fargo "failed to maintain, and failed to follow reasonable

16

procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of Plaintiffs' credit report" in violation of 15

17

U.S.C. § 1681e(b). (Id. at 4 ¶ 18.) They further contend that Wells Fargo failed to conduct a

18

proper and lawful reinvestigation. (Id.)

19

Plaintiffs maintain that Wells Fargo's conduct resulted in multiple denials of credit. (Id.

20

at 4-5 ¶ 21.) They state that the "negligent and noncompliant acts may have been a direct

21

violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681(n), (o)." (Id. at 5 ¶ 21.)
b. Analysis

22
23

"Congress enacted the [FCRA], 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1681x, in 1970 'to ensure fair and

24

accurate credit reporting, promote efficiency in the banking system, and protect consumer

25

privacy.'" Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson LLP, 584 F.3d 1147, 1153 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting

26

Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (2007)). In fact, the FCRA specifically states:

27

///

28

///

-5-

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

(a) Accuracy and fairness of credit reporting
The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit
reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking
system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence
which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system.
(2) An elaborate mechanism has been developed for investigating and
evaluating credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, and
general reputation of consumers.
(3) [CRAs] have assumed a vital role in assembling and evaluating
consumer credit and other information on consumers.
(4) There is a need to insure that [CRAs] exercise their grave
responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and a respect for the consumer's right
to privacy.
(b) Reasonable procedures
It is the purpose of this subchapter to require that consumer reporting agencies
adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer
credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and
equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy,
and proper utilization of such information in accordance with the requirements of
this subchapter.
15 U.S.C. § 1681.

13

"[T]o ensure that credit reports are accurate, the FCRA imposes some duties on the

14

sources that provide credit information to the [CRAs], called 'furnishers' in the statute." Gorman,

15

584 F.3d at 1153. Plaintiff alleges that Wells Fargo was a furnisher under the FCRA. The

16

furnishers' duties can be found in 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2. Subsection (a) of section 1681s-2

17

imposes a duty on furnishers to provide accurate information. It prohibits a furnisher from

18

reporting information that the furnisher knows or has reasonable cause to belief the information

19

is inaccurate. 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a)(1)(A). In addition, it prohibits a furnisher from furnishing

20

information to a CRA if it has been notified by a consumer that the information is inaccurate and

21

the information is in fact inaccurate. 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a)(1)(B)(i), (ii). If the furnisher

22

receives notice that the information furnished to a CRA is disputed by a consumer, the furnisher

23

many not furnish the information to any CRA without notifying the CRA that the consumer

24

disputes the information. 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a)(3).

25

Subsection (b) of section 1681s-2 contains additional obligations on furnishers which are

26

triggered by the receipt of notice of dispute under section 1681i(a)(2). 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1).

27

Section 1681i governs the procedure in a case of disputed accuracy. It provides:
[I]f the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a
consumer's file at a [CRA] is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies
the [CRA] directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the [CRA]

28

-6-

1
2
3

shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether
the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed
information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph (5),
before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency
receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller.

4
5

15 U.S.C.§ 1681i(a)(1)(A). It goes on to state: "Before the expiration of the 5-business-day

6

period beginning on the date on which a [CRA] receives notice of a dispute from any consumer

7

or a reseller in accordance with paragraph (1), the [CRA] shall provide notification of the dispute

8

to any person who provided any item of information in dispute, at the address and in the manner

9

established with the person. The notice shall include all relevant information regarding the

10
11

dispute that the agency has received from the consumer or reseller." 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(2)(A).

12

Thus, when a furnisher receives notice from a CRA pursuant to section 1681i(a)(2) of a

13

dispute regarding the completeness or accuracy of information provided by the furnisher to a

14

CRA, the furnisher is required to:

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;
(B) review all relevant information provided by the [CRA] pursuant to section
1681i(a)(2) of this title;
(C) report the results of the investigation to the [CRA];
(D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate,
report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person
furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on consumers on a
nationwide basis; and
(E) if an item of information disputed by a consumer is found to be inaccurate or
incomplete or cannot be verified after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1), for
purposes of reporting to a consumer reporting agency only, as appropriate, based
on the results of the reinvestigation promptly-(i) modify that item of information;
(ii) delete that item of information; or
(iii) permanently block the reporting of that item of information.
15 U.S.C.§ 1681s-2(b)(1)(A)-(E).

24
25
26
27
28

Congress made clear that a private right of action only exists for violations of subsection
(b). 15 U.S.C.§ 1681s-2(c)(1). Thus, to the extent Plaintiffs argue that Wells Fargo violated
subsection (a) by providing incomplete or inaccurate information to CRAs (Doc. # 1-1 at 3 ¶ 15),
they cannot state such a claim.

-7-

1

With respect to Plaintiffs' claim that Wells Fargo violated the provisions of subsection

2

(b), Plaintiffs acknowledge the deficiency of their claim in their Complaint. The duties in

3

subsection (b) are triggered by the receipt of a notice of dispute from a CRA to the furnisher. See

4

15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1). Plaintiffs specifically allege:

5

In § 1681s-2(b) duties arise only after a furnisher receives notice of dispute from a
CRA. Notice of a dispute to a furnisher by a consumer directly does not trigger a
furnishers duty to reinvestigate under § 1681s-2(b). ... This indirect 'filtering'
mechanism must be followed by a consumer to give rise to a duty of investigation
under the FCRA to the furnisher. A furnisher need not honor a dispute received
directly from a consumer, whether oral or written, under the FCRA.

6
7
8
9

(Doc. # 1-1 at 3 ¶ 17.)
Plaintiffs allege they received a notice from Wells Fargo alerting them to an alleged loan

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

debt, and in turn, Plaintiff served on Wells Fargo a "notice for validation of debt" pursuant to the
FDCPA. (Doc. # 1-1 at 2 ¶¶ 6-7.) Then, Plaintiffs received a response through Wells Fargo's
servicer including a copy of a mortgage note executed with another bank (not Wells Fargo). (Id.
¶ 8.) Thereafter, Plaintiffs obtained a consumer credit report from two CRAs and discovered
Wells Fargo was reporting this alleged debt to these CRAs. (Id. ¶ 9.) Nowhere do Plaintiffs
include an allegation that they sent a notice of dispute to the CRAs, who in turn notified the
purported furnisher, Wells Fargo, so as to trigger the duties imposed by 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b).
Finally, Plaintiffs assert that Wells Fargo violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b) by failing to

18
19
20
21

maintain and follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of Plaintiffs'
credit report. (Doc. # 1-1 at 4 ¶ 18.) This provision, however, is not applicable to furnishers, as
Plaintiffs allege Wells Fargo to be. Instead, it is applicable to CRAs.
As a result, Plaintiffs fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under the

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

FCRA against Wells Fargo. Plaintiffs shall be given an opportunity to amend their complaint, if
possible, to correct the deficiencies noted herein as to their claim for relief predicated on 15
U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b).
///
///
///

-8-

1
2

3. FDCPA Claim
a. Allegations

3

In their general allegations, Plaintiffs aver that Wells Fargo is a "debt collector" under

4

section 1692a(6) of the FDCPA, and were attempting to collect a debt used for a "household

5

purpose" as defined in section 1692a(5) of the FDCPA. (Doc. # 1-1 at 2 ¶ 11, 6 ¶ 33.)

6

Plaintiffs claim that they served Wells Fargo with a Notice of Dispute in compliance with

7

15 U.S.C. § 1692g, which triggered Wells Fargo's obligation to provide Plaintiffs with

8

verification of the alleged debt and to cease all collection activity until that was done. (Doc. # 1-

9

1 at 6 ¶ 35.) Plaintiffs contend that Wells Fargo has provided no proof of their alleged debt and

10

continue with their efforts to collect the debt. (Id.)

11

Plaintiffs go on to state that other possible violations of the FDCPA include: (A) section

12

1692d—engaging in conduct in connection with the collection of a debt that was harassing,

13

oppressive or abusive; (B) section 1692e(8)—requiring debt collectors to communicate the

14

disputed status of a debt if the debt collector knows or should know the debt is disputed;

15

(C) section 1692e(8) and 1692j—threatening or communicating false credit information,

16

including the failure to communicate that a debt is disputed; (D) section 1692j—using unfair or

17

unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect a debt; (E) section 1692f—attempting to

18

collect an amount not authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law; and

19

(F) section 1692f(6)—taking or threatening to unlawfully repossess or disable the consumer's

20

property. (Doc. # 1-1 at 6-7 ¶ 36.)

21

Plaintiffs claim that Wells Fargo knew it was not entitled to collect the alleged debt, and

22

that Wells Fargo knew they could not provide a contract executed by Plaintiffs which

23

demonstrated an obligation to Wells Fargo. (Id. at 7 ¶¶ 37-38.) Plaintiffs assert that their

24

consumer credit reports were damaged. (Id. at 7 ¶ 39.)

25

b. Analysis

26

The FDCPA was enacted "to eliminate abusive debt collection practices by debt

27

collectors, to insure that those debt collectors who refrain from using abusive debt collection

28

practices are not competitively disadvantaged, and to promote consistent State action to protect

-9-

1

consumers against debt collection abuses." 15 U.S.C. § 1692(e). "In furtherance of these

2

purposes, the FDCPA bans a variety of debt collection practices and allows individuals to sue

3

offending debt collectors." Schlegel v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 720 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir.

4

2013).

5

The FDCPA defines a "debt" as "any obligation or alleged obligation of a consumer to

6

pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services

7

which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household

8

purposes, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment." 15 U.S.C. § 1692(5).

9

Under the FDCPA, a "debt collector" is: "any person who uses any instrumentality of

10

interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection

11

of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or

12

due or asserted to be owed or due another." 15 U.S.C. § 1692(6). Plaintiffs' Complaint, therefore,

13

"must plead 'factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference' that Wells

14

Fargo is a debt collector." Schlegel, 720 F.3d at 1208 (citing Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678; Dougherty v.

15

City of Covina, 654 F.3d 892, 900-01 (9th Cir. 2011)).

16

Plaintiffs have not alleged that the principal purpose of Wells Fargo's business is the

17

collection of debts, or that Wells Fargo regularly collects or attempts to collect debts owed or

18

due or asserted to be owed or due to another. Instead, they merely allege that Wells Fargo

19

attempted to collect this alleged debt from them. This allegation does not fit either requirement

20

under the FDCPA—that a principal purpose of Wells Fargo's business is debt collection or that

21

Wells Fargo regularly collects or attempts to collect debts owed to another.

22

Moreover, Plaintiffs provide no factual allegations to support the inclusion of the

23

"possible" violation of sections 1692d, e(8), j, f, or f(6) of the FDCPA. They must include facts

24

to support a plausible claim for relief under these sections.
Plaintiffs shall have an opportunity to amend their complaint to cure the noted

25
26

deficiencies, if possible.

27

///

28

///

- 10 -

1

4. Invasion of Privacy

2

Plaintiffs also include a state law tort claim for invasion of privacy. (Doc. # 1-1 at 5.)

3

Instead of including factual allegations to support a claim that Wells Fargo invaded its privacy,

4

Plaintiffs merely assert that they should be allowed to conduct discovery to ascertain whether

5

this occurred. (Id. ¶ 25.) Plaintiffs may not maintain their claim on this basis alone. Instead, they

6

are required to allege facts which demonstrate a plausible claim for relief. Plaintiffs fail to state a

7

claim on this basis; however, they shall have an opportunity to amend to cure these deficiencies.

8

5. Negligent Hiring/Supervision

9

Finally, Plaintiffs claim that Wells Fargo knew of and approved the conduct of its

10

employees in attempting to collect the alleged debt, and negligently and/or intentionally hired,

11

trained, retained or supervised incompetent debt collectors who were allowed or encouraged to

12

violate the law. (Doc. # 1-1 at 5.)

13

This claim is dependent on the federal claims under the FCRA and FDCPA. Plaintiffs

14

have not adequately alleged violations of the FCRA or FDCPA; therefore, their negligent

15

hiring/supervision claim is likewise deficient because there is no harmful conduct to impute to

16

Wells Fargo by virtue of its hiring, training, retention of supervision of employees. Along with

17

the other claims, Plaintiffs shall have an opportunity to amend this claim.

18

III. CONCLUSION

19

(1) Plaintiffs' Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Doc. # 1) is GRANTED.

20

Plaintiff is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without the necessity of prepayment of

21

fees or costs or the giving of security therefor. The order granting in forma pauperis status does

22

not extend to the issuance of subpoenas at government expense;

23
24
25

(2) The Clerk is instructed to FILE the Complaint (Doc. # 1-1); however, the Complaint
shall be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH LEAVE TO AMEND;
(3) Plaintiffs have THIRTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER to file an

26

amended complaint remedying, if possible, the defects explained above. Plaintiffs are advised

27

that pursuant to Local Rule 15-1, if they elect to file an amended complaint, it shall be complete

28

in and of itself without reference to any previous complaint. Any allegations, parties or requests

- 11 -

1

for relief from prior papers that are not carried forward in the amended complaint will no longer

2

be before the court. Plaintiffs shall clear title the amended complaint as such by placing the

3

words "AMENDED COMPLAINT" on page 1 in the caption, and shall place the case number

4

above the words "AMENDED COMPLAINT." Plaintiffs are cautioned that if they fail to file an

5

amended complaint within the proscribed time period, the action will be dismissed.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

August 25, 2014.
__________________________________________
WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

- 12 -