Herrera v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
Heaven Enemecial Herrera,
Plaintiff,
v.
Experian 	Information 	Solutions,
Inc. and Trans Union, LLC,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 4:25-cv-04555
Consolidated with Civil Action
No. 4:25-cv-04558.
MEMORANDUM, RECOMMENDATION, AND ORDER
On July 7, 2026 Plaintiff Heaven Enemecial Herrera filed a motion to
dismiss her claims against Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc.
without prejudice. 	Dkt. 24. 	The motion lacks the mandatory certificate of
conference. 	S.D. Tex. Local R. 7.1(d).1 	But because Experian did not file a
response, Herrera’s request is deemed unopposed. S.D. Tex. L.R. 7.4.
A plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal requires a court order if the defendant
has filed an answer and did not sign the stipulation of dismissal. 	See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(a). 	That is the case with Experian, which filed an answer and did
not sign Herrera’s motion. 	See Dkt. 13 (answer); Dkt. 24. 	Nevertheless, the
Court sees no impediment to Herrera’s request, which should be granted.
1 Future filings lacking the required certificates will be stricken. 	Judge Ho’s
Procedures § 5(d)(5)(iv).
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
July 29, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-04555 Document 26 Filed 07/29/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
Herrera does not seek dismissal of her other claims against Trans Union,
LLC that were raised in a related suit that has been consolidated with this one.
Dkt. 24 at 1; see also Dkt. 17 (consolidation order). But Herrera’s live pleading
in this lead case does not raise those claims. 	Herrera therefore must file an
amended complaint that asserts her remaining claims.
Recommendation and Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff Heaven
Enemecial Herrera’s motion for partial voluntary dismissal (Dkt. 24) be
GRANTED, 	and 	that 	Herrera’s 	claims 	against 	Defendant 	Experian
Information Solutions, Inc. be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
It is ORDERED that Herrera must file an amended complaint by
August 12, 2026 in this lead case that asserts all her remaining claims.
The parties have fourteen days from service of this Report and
Recommendation to file written objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.
R. 	Civ. 	P. 	72(b). 	Failure 	to 	file 	timely 	objections 	will 	preclude
appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions, except for
plain error. 	Ortiz v. City of San Antonio Fire Dep’t, 806 F.3d 822, 825
(5th Cir. 2015).
Signed on July 29, 2026, at Houston, Texas.
______________________________
Yvonne Y. Ho
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:25-cv-04555 Document 26 Filed 07/29/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2