Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Oregon granted Del-One Federal Credit Union’s motion to dismiss Shaun Fleck’s amended complaint. The court held that Fleck failed to plausibly allege a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act because he did not plead facts showing that Del-One’s investigation was unreasonable or that the reported information was inaccurate or materially misleading. The amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice because further amendment would be futile.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court needed to resolve personal jurisdiction before deciding the FCRA claim.
- Whether Fleck plausibly alleged that Del-One violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation, failing to reconcile contradictory information, or continuing to furnish inaccurate or materially misleading information.
- Whether the amended complaint should be dismissed with prejudice because further amendment would be futile.
Holdings
- The court reached the merits of the FCRA claim without first resolving whether it had personal jurisdiction over Del-One.
- Fleck failed to state a plausible FCRA claim because he did not allege that Del-One failed to investigate or plead facts showing that Del-One's investigation was unreasonable, and he did not plausibly allege that Del-One's reporting was patently incorrect or materially misleading.
- The amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice because Fleck had already received an opportunity to amend and further amendment would be futile.
Key quotations
“For these reasons, the Court concludes that Fleck has again failed to state a FCRA claim and therefore dismisses his amended complaint with prejudice because further leave to amend would be futile.” (at 39)
Factual background
Fleck, an Oregon resident, became delinquent on an automobile loan from Del-One and Del-One charged off the remaining $31,550 balance in January 2022. In March 2025, Fleck disputed information associated with the account and demanded validation, release of the vehicle title, and removal of the lien. After initially stating that it lacked sufficient information to conduct a reasonable investigation, Del-One obtained supplemental information, investigated the dispute, and reported that the information was accurate. Fleck alleged that Del-One failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and continued reporting inaccurate or materially misleading information, including information involving multiple creditor identifiers.
Procedural history
Fleck filed suit on June 18, 2025, proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis. The court previously dismissed his original complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) with leave to amend. Fleck filed an amended complaint on April 8, 2026. The court held that the amended FCRA claim was not plausibly pleaded and dismissed it with prejudice because further amendment would be futile.