Reported / Citable
Background
Malik Amusat sued Santander Consumer USA Inc. alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) along with state law claims. Santander filed a motion to dismiss in October 2025, arguing that Amusat failed to allege sufficient facts to establish his claims. Amusat responded to the motion and sought leave to amend his complaint. Additionally, Amusat filed an emergency motion for preliminary injunction seeking injunctive relief based on the FCRA and filed a motion for partial summary judgment on a breach of accord and satisfaction claim.
The Court’s Holding
The magistrate judge denied Santander’s motion to dismiss as moot but exercised discretion to grant Amusat a single opportunity to amend his complaint. The amended complaint must address all deficiencies identified in the motion to dismiss and must be filed by May 8, 2026. Following Fifth Circuit precedent, the court noted that dismissing an action after giving a plaintiff only one opportunity to state his case is ordinarily unjustified. Future requests for amendment addressing already-identified deficiencies will be denied.
The court recommended denial of Amusat’s emergency motion for preliminary injunction because the FCRA does not allow private litigants to obtain injunctive relief. This holding was grounded in Fifth Circuit precedent establishing that FCRA remedies are limited to damages. The court also terminated Amusat’s motion for partial summary judgment as premature, noting that dispositive motions should be considered after discovery is complete and all relevant facts are developed. The court stayed all discovery and other proceedings pending resolution of any Rule 12 motions and the amended complaint.
Key Takeaways
- The FCRA does not provide a private right of action for injunctive relief; remedies are limited to damages.
- District courts ordinarily should allow at least one opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal for insufficient pleading.
- Summary judgment motions filed before discovery is complete may be deemed premature and deferred for consideration after the case has developed further.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces the Fifth Circuit’s long-standing principle that federal courts should favor allowing plaintiffs to cure pleading deficiencies through amendment rather than outright dismissal. For FCRA practitioners, the court’s reaffirmation that private litigants cannot seek injunctive relief is critical—remedies under the FCRA are confined to actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney’s fees, not equitable relief.
The court’s decision to stay discovery and defer all dispositive motions until after the amended complaint reflects a practical approach to case management, ensuring that the parties develop facts through discovery before the court addresses summary judgment and other substantive motions. This order provides guidance on proper pleading practice and temporal sequencing of motions in consumer credit litigation.