Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02393/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02393-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Fair Credit Reporting 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

Eddie Willie Taylor, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

The United States; the U.S. Internal

Revenue Service; the U.S. Department of

Education; the Department of the

Treasury; Kroll Factual Data Bureau;

Experian Information Solutions, Inc.;

Equifax Credit Information Services,

Inc.; Trans Union LLC; Landsafe Credit

Inc.; Lamson Junior College; Arizona

Education Loan Marketing Corporation;

and Southwest Student Services

Corporation,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-2393-PHX-DGC

ORDER

Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 16, 2010. Dkt. #51. Motions to dismiss

have been filed by Defendants Trans Union LLC (Dkt. #52), Landsafe Credit Inc. (Dkt. #55),

and Kroll Factual Data Inc. (Dkt. #57). Plaintiff failed to file responses within the time

period provided in the civil rules of procedure. See LRCiv 7.2(c); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). On

June 1, 2010, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiff until June 11, 2010 to file a

response to each motion. Dkt. #64.

Plaintiff has filed a response to that order. Dkt. #65. He claims that he never received

copies of the motions to dismiss and therefore could not respond to them. Id. at 1-2. It

appears from the record that each motion was mailed to Plaintiff at his address of record:

Case 2:09-cv-02393-DGC Document 67 Filed 06/14/10 Page 1 of 2
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 -

4041 E Hidalgo Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona, 85040. Plaintiff received the June 1 order

(Dkt. #64) mailed to that same address. It is unclear why Plaintiff would not have received

any of the three motions to dismiss.

In the interest of justice, the Court will direct the Clerk to mail copies of the motions

to Plaintiff. Responses to the motions will be due no later than July 2, 2010. Plaintiff is

again warned (see Dkt. ##47, 64) that if he fails to prosecute this action, or if he fails to

comply with the rules or any Court order, the Court may dismiss the action with prejudice

pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir.1992); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of each motion to dismiss (Dkt. ##52, 55,

57) to Plaintiff.

2. Plaintiff shall file a response to each motion by July 2, 2010. Plaintiff is

warned that no further extensions will be granted.

3. Plaintiff is further warned that the Court will summarily grant the motions to

dismiss if Plaintiff fails to comply with this order.

DATED this 14th day of June, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-02393-DGC Document 67 Filed 06/14/10 Page 2 of 2