Taylor v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ELIJAH TYRELL TAYLOR,
Plaintiff
v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION
SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Defendant
No. 1 :25cv70
(Judge Munley)
•••••••• ■ ■• ■ ••••••••••••••••••••••••• ■ •• ■ ■ •••• ■ •••••• ■ • ■ ••••••• •• •••• ■• ■ • ■ ••••• ■ •••• • •••• ■ •••• ■ •••••••••• ■ ••
............................................................................................................
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff Elijah Tyrell Taylor filed a prose amended complaint against
Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. ("Experian") for violations of the
Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA" ), 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. and the federal
identity theft statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1028. Experian responded with a Rule 12(b)(6)
motion to dismiss. 	Experian seeks dismissal with prejudice.
In short, Taylor's prose filings are difficult to understand. Even when the
amended complaint is liberally construed, the court cannot determine Taylor's
theory of liability against the defendant. 	Additionally, it appears that some of the
plaintiff's allegations are internally inconsistent.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require a pleading to contain "a short
and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction" and "a short and
plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. " Binsack
Case 1:25-cv-00070-JKM Document 18 Filed 01/07/26 Page 1 of 5

v. Lackawanna Cnty. Prison , 438 F. App'x 158, 160 (3d Cir. 2011) (quoting FED.
R. CIv. P. 8(a)(1), (2)); see also Glover v. F.D.I.C., 698 F.3d 139, 147 (3d Cir.
2012). A complaint should provide fair notice of what each claim is and the
grounds upon which they rest. Garrett v. Wexford Health , 938 F. 3d 69, 92 (3d
Cir. 2019).
To survive a motion to dismiss, the complaint must also contain sufficient
factual matter, accepted as true , to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face. " Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662 , 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 , 570 (2007)). 	A claim has facial plausibility when factual
content is pied which allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the
defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged . kl (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at
570). "Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action , supported by
mere conclusory statements, do not suffice. " kl (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at
555).
Taylor's amended complaint appears to allege that he was denied a
secured credit card by Discover Financial Services, Inc. ("Discover"). (Doc. 4 ,
Am. Compl. at ECF p. 6). Thereafter, Taylor applied for and received an
unsecured credit card from Credit One Bank, N.A. ("Cred it One"). kl at 7. Taylor
further alleges that either Discover or Experian sold his consumer report to Credit
One when he could not obtain a credit card from Discover. Id.
2
Case 1:25-cv-00070-JKM Document 18 Filed 01/07/26 Page 2 of 5

At the same time, Taylor appears to assert that Experian reported nine (9)
entries related to Discover on his credit report, but that this was inaccurate
reporting . kt at 10 . An exhibit attached to the complaint indicates that there were
hard inquiries on Taylor's credit report from Discover. (Doc. 4-1, Exhs. to Am .
Compl. at ECF pp. 34 - 38 . But based on allegations that Taylor applied for a
Discover credit card and a Credit One credit card , one would presume that there
would be hard inquiries on a credit report from those financial institutions.
Plaintiff's amended complaint does not reconcile these apparent contradictions or
allege any other inaccuracies in his consumer reports. 1 Since Taylor's complaint
fails to state a claim under the FCRA, Experian's motion to dismiss will be
granted. 	The amended complaint will be dismissed .
Nonetheless, a plausible FCRA claim against Experian may be lurking in
the shadow of the extra words and exhibits supplied by the plaintiff. See
Plaintiff will be provided with thirty (30) days to file a second amended complaint
regarding his FCRA claims only.2
1 Taylor's amended complaint requests $2 ,724 ,941 .63 in damages. (Doc. 4 at 13) .
2 Taylor's claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1028 will be dismissed with prejudice. 	Section 1028 does
not provide for a private right of action by a litigant such as the plaintiff. Obianyo v. Tennessee ,
518 F. App 'x 71, 72 (3d Cir. 2013) (citing Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe , 536 U.S. 273 , 283- 84
(2002)).
3
Case 1:25-cv-00070-JKM Document 18 Filed 01/07/26 Page 3 of 5

The second amended complaint should be a stand-alone document,
complete in itself and without reference to any previous pleadings. 	The amended
complaint should set forth Taylor's claims in short, concise, and plain statements,
and in numbered paragraphs , each limited to a single fact per paragraph as far
as practicable. See FED. R. CIv. P. 8(a), 8(d), and 10 . If Taylor believes that
Experian furnished his consumer report without a statutorily provided permissible
purpose, he should identify the recipient and when it was supplied. 	Taylor's
second amended complaint should not hide any allegations about inaccuracies in
his credit report. 	Plaintiff is directed to state wh ich items on his credit report are
wrong, why they are wrong, and when he discovered the errors. 	Plaintiff is also
directed to state when and how he notified Experian of the discrepancies and the
results of same. 	Taylor need not copy and paste long passages of statutes,
dictionary entries, or court cases. 	Rather, plaintiff must simply state the facts of
his situation . If Taylor continues to plead his claims in riddles or rely upon
mutually exclusive facts without explanation , his claims will be dismissed with
prejudice. Furthermore, if Taylor fails to file a second amended complaint within
the period provided by the court, his claims will be dismissed with prejudice for
failure to prosecute and/or failure to comply with a court order.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1) Experian's motion to dismiss, (Doc. 13), is GRANTED ;
4
Case 1:25-cv-00070-JKM Document 18 Filed 01/07/26 Page 4 of 5

2) Taylor's claims against Experian arising out of 18 U.S.C. § 1028 are
DISMISSED with prejudice;
3) Taylor's FCRA claims against Experian are DISMISSED without
prejudice;
4) Taylor may file a second amended complaint within thirty (30) days of
this order addressing the deficiencies discussed above; and
5) Should Taylor fail to file a second amended complaint within this period ,
the court will dismiss plaintiff's FCRA claims with prejudice and without
additional notice to the plaintiff.
States D
5
Case 1:25-cv-00070-JKM Document 18 Filed 01/07/26 Page 5 of 5