Aragon v. Experian Data Corporation

Opinion

DANIEL ARAGON, Case No. 25-cv-0814-BAS-SBC

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S v. EX PARTE MOTION TO EXTEND

(ECF No. 6) Defendant. Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (“Experian” or “Defendant”) has moved ex parte for an extension of its time to respond to the Complaint. (ECF No. 6.) The Court denies this motion as improperly filed for the following reasons. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), federal courts must screen all in forma pauperis complaints and any amended complaints before allowing the case to move forward, issuing summonses, and requiring a responsive pleading. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (§ 1915(e) applies to “all in forma pauperis complaints”). If a complaint states a valid claim for relief, the court will direct the Clerk of Court to issue summons to the defendant(s) and the plaintiff must then serve the summons and complaint within 90 days. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Plaintiff filed their complaint with an accompanying Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) The summons has not yet been issued in this case as the complaint has not yet been screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Therefore, Experian has not yet been properly served and the clock has not begun on its deadline to respond to the Complaint. With this in mind, the Motion to Extend is DENIED without prejudice. (ECF No. 6.) DATED: June 2, 2025 ii ly A (Dipharb Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge United States District Court

a.