Tufano v. Experian et al
3:26-cv-02138 · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
About this case
Evidentiary treatment: This summarizes the plaintiff's own allegations as stated in the complaint or docket record cited below. It reflects what was filed, not a court finding, and is not a determination that the allegations are true.
Plaintiff sued Experian, TransUnion LLC, and a third entity listed on the docket as “Equinax” (apparently referring to Equifax). The docket lists the nature of suit as “Civil Rights: Other” with a diversity-jurisdiction fraud cause of action, consistent with a dispute over allegedly inaccurate credit reporting and/or the credit bureaus' investigation/reinvestigation practices. No excerpt of the complaint's specific factual allegations could be independently located.
CourtListener/RECAP records the cause as 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud against a nature-of-suit code of 440 Civil Rights: Other, jurisdiction Diversity, jury demand by the plaintiff. Two points are worth noting: the nature-of-suit code and the cause of action are internally inconsistent on the docket itself, and the case is coded as a common-law fraud claim in diversity rather than under the Fair Credit Reporting Act — there is no reference to 15 U.S.C. 1681 anywhere in the docket coding, which is notable for a suit against all three national credit bureaus. Whether the complaint body nonetheless pleads FCRA cannot be determined.
Sourcing limitation (23 Aug 2026): the complaint itself remains unread — no document on this docket is available through RECAP, and no published opinion exists for this case on GovInfo. The claims description above is therefore based on docket coding, not on the complaint's own text.
Defendants
- Equinax
- Experian
- TransUnion LLC
Source record
This page separates court/ruling records, party filings, research classifications, secondary sources and public statements. Unknown or unresolved fields remain labelled as such.
Outcome and research status
Research status: Source-backed (CourtListener/RECAP docket snapshot)
Research notes: Update 2026-08-23: Assigned to Magistrate Judge Leo A. Latella. CourtListener/RECAP shows three opening docket entries, all 2026-07-29 (complaint with civil cover sheet, summons issued, pro se letter), and nothing after. Nature of suit 440 Civil Rights: Other; cause 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud; jurisdiction Diversity. All seven 2026-07-29 filings (3:26-cv-02132 through 3:26-cv-02138) were fee-paid at $405 under a single shared receipt number 333120943, not filed in forma pauperis, so no 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) screening track applies; they were assigned across five different magistrate judges with no consolidation and no common screening order. Two coding anomalies are worth recording: the nature-of-suit code (440 Civil Rights: Other) and the cause of action (28:1332 Diversity-Fraud) are internally inconsistent on the docket itself, and despite naming all three national credit bureaus the docket carries no reference to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681. Whether the complaint body nonetheless pleads FCRA cannot be determined; the complaint is not available. RECAP mirrors only what a PACER user has already fetched, so the absence of later entries is not affirmative proof of docket inactivity. No published opinion exists for this case on GovInfo (verified against a working control). Docket record: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73689465/ Update 2026-09-23: Docket metadata confirms the assigned judge as Judge Leo A. Latella. No other change; the docket is unmoved since the last pass.
Cite this page
Frank Tufano Litigation Research. "Tufano v. Experian et al (3:26-cv-02138)". Research last verified September 23, 2026. https://suedbyfranktufano.com/cases/3-26-cv-02138-tufano-v-experian-et-al/