LYLE v. TRANS UNION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RHONDA LYLE 	: 	CIVIL ACTION
:
v. 	: 	NO. 	25-2647
:
TRANS UNION 	:
ORDER
AND NOW, this 8th day of January 2026, upon considering defendant’s motion to
dismiss (DI 9), plaintiff’s opposition (DI 11), defendant’s reply (DI 23), plaintiff’s amended
opposition (DI 29), plaintiff’s motion to consolidate cases (DI 38), plaintiff’s motion to vacate
dismissal (DI 39), defendants’ response to the entirety of the record (DI 47), plaintiff’s response
to the entirety of the record (DI 48), and for reasons in the accompanying memorandum, it is
ORDERED:
1. 	Defendant’s motion to dismiss (DI 9) is GRANTED with prejudice with respect
to Ms. Lyle’s FCRA claims against TransUnion, insofar as the FCRA claims pertain to
TransUnion’s alleged conduct prior to the execution of the settlement agreement between Ms.
Lyle and TransUnion in No. 24-cv-1831. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (DI 9) is GRANTED
without prejudice for all other claims against TransUnion, which include her (1) FCRA claim
against TransUnion for TransUnion’s alleged conduct after the execution of the settlement
agreement between Ms. Lyle and TransUnion in No. 24-cv-1831; (2) FDCPA claim against
TransUnion; and (3) common law fraud and misrepresentation claims against TransUnion.
2. 	Plaintiff’s motion to consolidate cases (DI 38) is DENIED.
3. 	Plaintiff’s motion to vacate dismissal (DI 39) is DENIED.
4. 	Plaintiff may, no later than January 21, 2026, file a fourth amended complaint
addressing only the claims dismissed without prejudice if she can plead facts sufficient to
Case 2:25-cv-02647-JFM Document 50 Filed 01/08/26 Page 1 of 2

2
overcome the deficiencies outlined in our accompanying memorandum.
MURPHY, J.
Case 2:25-cv-02647-JFM Document 50 Filed 01/08/26 Page 2 of 2