Mariam Dermendjian v. Experian Information Solutions Incorporated, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona grants Mariam Dermendjian’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismisses her Fair Credit Reporting Act complaint for failure to allege sufficient facts supporting claims against the credit reporting agency and furnishers, but grants 30 days to amend.

Holdings

1. The IFP application was sufficient because Dermendjian could not pay court costs while still affording the necessities of life.
2. The complaint had to be dismissed because it failed to state plausible claims under the FCRA and consisted of conclusory allegations lacking factual detail about the alleged inaccuracies and defendants' conduct.
3. Count I failed to state a claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1681i because Plaintiff did not identify the disputed items, the alleged inaccuracies, the nature of Experian's reinvestigation, or why the reinvestigation was inadequate.
4. Counts II and III failed because Plaintiff did not allege facts showing that the reported information was inaccurate, a necessary predicate to her claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681s-2(b).
5. Count IV failed because §§ 1681n and 1681o are remedial provisions rather than independent substantive causes of action, and Plaintiff alleged no underlying substantive violation or nonconclusory facts showing willfulness or negligence.
6. Plaintiff was entitled to 30 days to file an amended complaint because the court could not conclude that amendment would be futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Dermendjian satisfied the financial eligibility requirements for proceeding in forma pauperis.
2. Whether the complaint stated plausible FCRA claims for failure to reinvestigate under 15 U.S.C. § 1681i, failure to assure accuracy under § 1681e(b), furnisher liability under § 1681s-2(b), and willful or negligent noncompliance under §§ 1681n and 1681o.
3. Whether Dermendjian should receive leave to amend the deficient complaint.

Disposition

dismissed