Heather Wing v. TransUnion LLC

Wing · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas · January 23, 2026 · No. 4:25-cv-00565

Summary

The court adopts a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation in an action alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. It denies the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment without prejudice as premature, grants the defendant’s Rule 56(d) motion to that extent, and denies the defendant’s request for fees and costs.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Writing for the Court
Campbell Barker
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Decision date
January 23, 2026
Docket number
4:25-cv-00565
Procedural posture
Plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment before discovery commenced. The magistrate judge recommended denying the motion without prejudice as premature, granting defendant's Rule 56(d) motion to that extent, and denying defendant's request for fees and costs. The district court reviewed the unobjected-to report for clear error and adopted its recommendations.
Standard of review
Clear-error review of an unobjected-to magistrate judge's report and recommendation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Precedential value
Unpublished district court order; precedential status unknown
Parties
Heather Wing v. TransUnion LLC
Disposition
other

Topics

summary judgmentdiscovery disputecredit reportingconsumer protectioncivil procedure

Practice areas

civil procedureconsumer protectioncredit reporting

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the magistrate judge's unobjected-to report and recommendation contained clear error.
  2. Whether plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment should be denied without prejudice as premature because adequate time for discovery had not elapsed.
  3. Whether defendant was entitled to fees and costs based on the premature summary-judgment motion.

Holdings

  1. When no timely objections are filed to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the district court need only determine whether the record shows clear error; the court found none and adopted the report's findings and recommendations.
  2. A summary-judgment motion may be denied without prejudice as premature when it is filed before an adequate time for discovery has passed.
  3. Defendant was not entitled to fees and costs on the record presented.

Key quotations

When there have been no timely objections to a report, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” (2)
Generally, summary judgment may be granted only after an ‘adequate time for discovery.’ (2)

Factual background

Wing brought an action alleging that TransUnion violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Before discovery commenced, she sought partial summary judgment on four claims, two of which were not pleaded in her complaint. TransUnion argued under Rule 56(d) that the motion was premature because adequate discovery had not occurred and separately sought fees and costs.

Procedural history

Heather Wing sued TransUnion LLC for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Before discovery began, Wing moved for partial summary judgment on four claims, including two claims not pleaded in the complaint. TransUnion moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) to deny the motion as premature and sought fees and costs. After no party objected to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the district court found no clear error, denied Wing's motion without prejudice, granted TransUnion's motion insofar as it sought denial as premature, and denied the request for fees and costs.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…