Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_03-cv-00525/USCOURTS-azd-3_03-cv-00525-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Christine Baker, )

)

Plaintiff, ) No. CIV 03-525-PCT RCB

)

vs. ) O R D E R

)

Fair Isaac and Company, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. ) )

On March 15, 2006, Plaintiff Christine Baker ("Baker") filed a

motion requesting leave to file a First Amended Complaint in this

matter. Mot. for Leave (doc. 248). Baker seeks to amend her

Complaint by removing the parties that have already been dismissed

from this lawsuit, and adding new claims against Defendants

Experian and ConsumerInfo.com. Id. at 1-2. In addition, Baker

seeks to add claims against Verizon for negligence and gross

negligence, and claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

("FDCPA"). Id. at 2, 10. 

Verizon opposes Baker's motion and asserts that it should be

denied. D. Resp. (doc. 257). Among other things, Verizon argues 

Case 3:03-cv-00525-RCB Document 288 Filed 05/17/06 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

that Baker's motion should be denied because of her undue delay. 

Id. at 9-11. 

Here, Plaintiff's Motion to Amend was filed three

years after Plaintiff filed her original

complaint. Yet, the Amended Complaint contains no

newly discovered information. Instead, the Amended

Complaint simplifies, re-orders, and regurgitates

the allegations contained in the original

Complaint. Given that after three full years,

Plaintiff has come forward with no new facts to

support her claims, Plaintiff's request to amend

is the product of excessive and undue delay.

Id. at 10. Baker fails to respond to this argument as it applies

to Verizon, or to Defendants Experian and ConsumerInfo.com. P.

Reply (doc. 266). Moreover, Defendants Experian and

ConsumerInfo.com failed to file any response to Baker's motion for

leave to amend, or join Verizon's response to such motion. The

effect of a denial of Baker's motion could be deemed to have a

similar effect on Experian and ConsumerInfo.com. Thus, the Court

does not know whether Defendants Experian and ConsumerInfo.com have

positions on either Baker's motion or on Verizon's opposition to

Baker's motion arguing undue delay.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants Experian and ConsumerInfo.com

have ten (10) days from the date of this order to respond to

Baker's motion for leave to amend. Baker, to the extent she

wishes to do so, may file a reply to Defendants Experian and

ConsumerInfo.com's responses on or by ten (10) days from the date

. . . 

Case 3:03-cv-00525-RCB Document 288 Filed 05/17/06 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

of the filing of such response(s). 

 DATED this 16th day of May, 2006.

Copies to counsel of record and Plaintiff, pro per.

Case 3:03-cv-00525-RCB Document 288 Filed 05/17/06 Page 3 of 3