(PS) Clay v. Transworld Systems Inc. ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEROME A. CLAY, No. 2:19-cv-2221 JAM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC., et al, ORDER 15 Defendants. 16 17 This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 18 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending before the court are plaintiff’s complaint, request for leave to 19 proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and request for permission for electronic 20 filing. (ECF Nos. 1-3.) The complaint concerns alleged violations of defendants’ credit reporting 21 responsibilities. 22 I. Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 23 The court is required to screen complaints brought by parties proceeding in forma 24 pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 25 2000) (en banc). The undersigned finds that plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application makes the 26 showing required by the statute. (ECF No. 2.) However, the court must dismiss an in forma 27 pauperis case at any time if the allegation of poverty is found to be untrue or if it is determined 28 that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or 1 seeks monetary relief against an immune defendant. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A complaint is 2 legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis in law or in fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 3 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28 (9th Cir. 1984). Under this 4 standard, a court must dismiss a complaint as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably 5 meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 6 327; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). 7 To state a claim on which relief may be granted, the plaintiff must allege “enough facts to 8 state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 9 570 (2007). In considering whether a complaint states a cognizable claim, the court accepts as 10 true the material allegations in the complaint and construes the allegations in the light most 11 favorable to the plaintiff. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984); Hosp. Bldg. Co. v. 12 Trustees of Rex Hosp., 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976); Love v. United States, 915 F.2d 1242, 1245 13 (9th Cir. 1989). Pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by 14 lawyers. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). However, the court need not accept as true 15 conclusory allegations, unreasonable inferences, or unwarranted deductions of fact. Western 16 Mining Council v. Watt, 643 F.2d 618, 624 (9th Cir. 1981). 17 The minimum requirements for a civil complaint in federal court are as follows: 18 A pleading which sets forth a claim for relief . . . shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court’s 19 jurisdiction depends . . . , (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for 20 judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. 21 Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). 22 II. Plaintiff’s Complaint 23 A. Defendant Transworld Systems, Inc. 24 The complaint alleges that on August 18, 2019, plaintiff “sent correspondence” to three 25 credit reporting agencies regarding a medical bill found on plaintiff’s credit report. (Compl. 26 (ECF No. 1) at 3.) “One or more of the credit bureaus sent dispute notices to [defendant 27 Transworld Systems, Inc.,”] (“Transworld”). (Id.) Defendant Transworld “refused to update and 28 //// 1 correct Plaintiff’s credit profile, despite Plaintiff’s many phone calls and letters” in violation of 2 the “Fair Credit Reporting Act,” (“FCRA”). (Id.) 3 The goal of the FCRA is “to ensure fair and accurate credit reporting, promote efficiency 4 in the banking system, and protect consumer privacy.” Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 5 47, 52 (2007). The 6 FCRA imposes a number of procedural requirements on consumer reporting agencies to regulate their creation and use of consumer 7 reports. The statute gives consumers affected by a violation of such requirements a right to sue the responsible party, including the right 8 to sue (and to recover statutory damages) for willful violations even if the consumer cannot show that the violation caused him to sustain 9 any actual damages. 10 Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., 867 F.3d 1108, 1110-11 (9th Cir. 2017). 11 Based on the above allegations, the undersigned finds that the complaint states a claim for 12 violation of the FCRA against defendant Transworld. 13 B. Defendants Transunion and Experian 14 The complaint also names as defendants Transunion LLC, (“Transunion”), and Experian 15 Information Solutions Inc., (“Experian”). (Compl. (ECF No. 1) at 1.) As to these defendants, the 16 complaint alleges that on December 6, 2016, plaintiff became unable to work and applied for 17 disability. (Id. at 4.) Plaintiff’s employer “denied Plaintiff’s benefits beyond March 15, 2017,” 18 resulting in “an ongoing lawsuit against [plaintiff’s] employer for non-payment of medical bills.” 19 (Id.) 20 According to the complaint plaintiff “complied with all requests of” defendants 21 Transunion and Experian “to have the erroneous marks removed from his credit report,” but these 22 defendants “failed to correct the errors and failed to undertake sufficient investigations upon 23 being notified of these errors.” (Id. at 4.) The complaint, however, alleges no facts in support of 24 these vague and conclusory allegations. For example, the complaint does not allege what date 25 plaintiff contacted either defendant, the nature of the erroneous information, specifics about any 26 communication with either defendant, etc. 27 Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopt a flexible pleading policy, a 28 complaint must give the defendant fair notice of the plaintiff’s claims and must allege facts that 1 state the elements of each claim plainly and succinctly. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); Jones v. 2 Community Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). “A pleading that offers ‘labels 3 and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic recitation of the elements of cause of action will not do.’ Nor 4 does a complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertions’ devoid of ‘further factual 5 enhancements.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 6 557). A plaintiff must allege with at least some degree of particularity overt acts which the 7 defendants engaged in that support the plaintiff’s claims. Jones, 733 F.2d at 649. 8 In this regard, the complaint fails to state a claim for relief against defendant Transunion 9 and defendant Experian. 10 III. Motion for Electronic Filing 11 Plaintiff’s motion for electronic filing sets forth a number of items that must be addressed 12 before the court can grant permission for electronic filing. For example, the motion asks whether 13 plaintiff “is able to comply all the requirements of . . . electronic submission[.]” (Pl.’s Mot. (ECF 14 No. 3) at 2.) Despite setting forth the relevant issues, plaintiff does not affirmatively answer any 15 of the relevant questions. Instead, they are left blank. 16 Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion will be denied without prejudice to renewal to a motion 17 that addresses the relevant issues with granting electronic filing. 18 CONCLUSION 19 For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 20 1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is granted. 21 2. Plaintiff may proceed now against defendant Transworld, as set forth below, and 22 pursue the complaint’s claims against only that defendant. Alternatively, plaintiff may forgo 23 immediately proceeding against defendant Transworld and attempt to amend the complaint. 24 3. If plaintiff elects to amend the complaint to address the issued noted above, 25 plaintiff has sixty days so to do. Plaintiff is not obligated to amend the complaint. However, if 26 plaintiff does so, the amended complaint will also be subject to screening.1 27 1 Plaintiff is reminded that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make an amended 28 complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that any amended complaint be complete in itself 1 4. If plaintiff elects to proceed against defendant Transworld, then within thirty days 2 | plaintiff shall file a short statement stating that plaintiff has elected to proceed against defendant 3 | Transworld. In this event the court will set this matter for a Status Conference and construe 4 | plaintiffs filing as consent to the dismissal of all claims against defendants Transunion and 5 | Experian without prejudice.” 6 5. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to comply with this order may result in a 7 || recommendation that this action be dismissed. 8 Dated: April 10, 2020 9 10 ORAH BARNES 12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 DLB:6 20 DB/orders/orders.pro se/clay2221 .part.serve.ord 21 22 . . . . . 1s without reference to prior pleadings. The amended complaint will supersede the original 23 | complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Thus, in an amended complaint, just as if it were the initial complaint filed in the case, each defendant must be listed in the caption 24 | and identified in the body of the complaint, and each claim and the involvement of each > defendant must be sufficiently alleged. Any amended complaint which plaintiff may elect to file 5 must also include concise but complete factual allegations describing the conduct and events 26 | Which underlie plaintiff’s claims. 27 || * Prior to screening plaintiffs complaint, defendant Transworld voluntarily appeared in this action. Accordingly, service on defendant Transworld no longer need be addressed. 28