ALEXANDRA TIAKOH
v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation, granting the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, which the Magistrate Judge recommended granting. The Magistrate Judge found the complaint alleg…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Fair Credit Reporting Act cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge's report recommending that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) be granted. Dkt. 6. The time for filing objections has passed.
Absent objection, the Court conducts a “careful and complete" review of the report and recommendation. Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982 (per curiam) (quotation citation omitted). "Clear error" review applies to portions of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (citation modified). Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 F. App’x 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams, 681 F. 2d at 732.
The Magistrate Judge, in a thorough and well-reasoned analysis, found that the complaint (Dkt. 1) alleges a sufficient basis to support a reasonable inference that Defendant is liable for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 15 U.S.C. § 1681(a), e(b), g, n. Dkt. 6 at 5. Having performed a de novo and independent review of the Complaint, and for the sound reasons explained in the Report and Recommendation, the Court rules as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 6) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and made a part of this Order.
2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) is GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff Alexandra Tiakoh is DIRECTED to file a proposed summons with the Clerk's Office, serve process, and file proof of service or a status report concerning the same by November 20, 2025.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on October 6, 2025.
s/William F. Jung
WILLIAM F. JUNG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Plaintiff, pro se
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)