Thompson v. Bank of America, N.A. et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
BRYCE THOMPSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
NOVEMBER 17, 2025, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [55] AND DENYING
MOTION TO DISMISS [41] AS MOOT
This consumer credit lawsuit was filed by Plaintiff Bryce Thompson against
Defendants Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”), and three credit reporting agencies—
Experian Information Solutions, Inc.; Equifax Information Services, LLC; and Trans Union,
LLC (the “CRA Defendants”). (ECF No. 28.) The CRA Defendants filed a joint motion to
dismiss. (ECF No. 41.) Upon learning that Plaintiff and the CRA Defendants intended to
file stipulations of dismissal as to all three CRA Defendants (i.e., the moving parties in the
motion to dismiss) the Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation to deny the
motion to dismiss as moot. (ECF No. 55.)
Although the report and recommendation explicitly stated that the parties may
object to and seek review of the recommendation within 14 days of service of the report,
no objections were filed during that window. “[T]he failure to object to the magistrate
judge's report[ ] releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter.” Hall
v. Rawal, 2012 WL 3639070, at *1 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 24, 2012) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474
U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). The Court nonetheless agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s
Case No: 24-13149
Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds
Magistrate Judge David R. Grand
Case 2:24-cv-13149-NGE-DRG ECF No. 58, PageID.<pageID> Filed 12/03/25 Page 1 of 2

2
conclusion that the motion to dismiss is moot. The Court therefore ACCEPTS AND
ADOPTS 	the 	Magistrate 	Judge’s 	report 	and 	recommendation. 	Accordingly, 	IT 	IS
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 41) is DENIED AS MOOT.
SO ORDERED.
s/Nancy G. Edmunds
Nancy G. Edmunds
United States District Judge
Dated: December 3, 2025
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or
counsel of record on December 3, 2025, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Marlena Williams
Case Manager
Case 2:24-cv-13149-NGE-DRG ECF No. 58, PageID.<pageID> Filed 12/03/25 Page 2 of 2