United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Sherman Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
L. MAZZANT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
before the Court is Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, a
Division of Wells Fargo Bank's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt.
#14). Having considered the motion and the relevant
pleadings, the Court finds that the motion should be denied.
filed his complaint on November 12, 2018 (Dkt. #1), and his
amended complaint on May 8, 2019 (Dkt. #3). Plaintiff alleges
violations of the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act that
Plaintiff claims entitles him to “actual, statutory and
punitive damages, costs, and attorney's fees” (Dkt.
#3 ¶ 1).
Plaintiff claims that as of August 10, 2012, all of
Plaintiffs Wells Fargo accounts were paid in full (Dkt. #3
¶ 8). But a TransUnion credit report dated December 22,
2016, alerted Plaintiff that his Wells Fargo account was 120
days past due (Dkt. #3 ¶ 9). Plaintiff claims this is
impossible given the zero balance on his Wells Fargo account
as of August 10, 2012 (Dkt. #3 ¶ 10). Plaintiff alleges
that he mailed a “detailed and thorough dispute letter
to TransUnion, ” but that Wells Fargo verified the
past-due report as accurate, causing TransUnion to continue
reporting the inaccurate information at the behest of Wells
Fargo (Dkt. #3 ¶ 11). Apparently, Wells Fargo did not
provide a good-faith investigation regarding the dispute
(Dkt. #3 ¶¶ 15, 36). This inaccurate information,
Plaintiff asserts, negatively reflects upon Plaintiff's
credit score and credit worthiness (Dkt. #3 ¶¶
17, 2019, Defendant filed its Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #14).
On July 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed his response (Dkt. #28), and
Defendant replied on July 15, 2019 (Dkt. #31).
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that each claim in a
complaint include a “short and plain statement . . .
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Each claim must include enough factual
allegations “to raise a right to relief above the
speculative level.” Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007).
12(b)(6) motion allows a party to move for dismissal of an
action when the complaint fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). When
considering a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the
Court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the
plaintiff's complaint and view those facts in the light
most favorable to the plaintiff. Bowlby v. City of
Aberdeen, 681 F.3d 215, 219 (5th Cir. 2012). The Court
may consider “the complaint, any documents attached to
the complaint, and any documents attached to the motion to
dismiss that are central to the claim and referenced by the
complaint.” Lone Star Fund V (U.S.), L.P. v.
Barclays Bank PLC, 594 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 2010).
The Court must then determine whether the complaint states a
claim for relief that is plausible on its face. “A
claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads
factual content that allows the [C]ourt to draw the
reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged.” Gonzalez v. Kay, 577 F.3d
600, 603 (5th Cir. 2009) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). “But where the well-pleaded
facts do not permit the [C]ourt to infer more than the mere
possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged-but it
has not ‘show[n]'-‘that the pleader is
entitled to relief.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
679 (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2)).
Iqbal, the Supreme Court established a two-step
approach for assessing the sufficiency of a complaint in the
context of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. First, the Court should
identify and disregard conclusory allegations, for they are
“not entitled to the assumption of truth.”
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 664. Second, the Court
“consider[s] the factual allegations in [the complaint]
to determine if they plausibly suggest an entitlement to
relief.” Id. “This standard
‘simply calls for enough facts to raise a reasonable
expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of the
necessary claims or elements.'” Morgan v.
Hubert, 335 Fed.Appx. 466, 470 (5th Cir. 2009) (citation
omitted). This evaluation will “be a context-specific
task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its
judicial experience and common sense.” Iqbal,
556 U.S. at 679.
“[t]o survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must
contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.”' Id. at 678 (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570).
reviewing the Complaint, the motion to dismiss, the response,
and the reply, the Court finds that Plaintiff has stated
plausible claims for purposes ...