Lokinski v. Experian Information Solution, Inc.

E.D. Michigan

Lokinski v. Experian Information Solution, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Michigan·Decided September 10, 2025·No. 1:25-cv-12483·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

MARKEL K. LOKINSKI,

Plaintiff, Case No. 1:25-cv-12483

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington United States District Judge EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., et al., Honorable Patricia T. Morris United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. _________________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND REMANDING CASE TO 71B DISTRICT COURT

In May 2025, Plaintiff Markel K. Lokinski sued Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc., and various other Defendants in the 71B District Court in Tuscola County, Michigan. See generally ECF Nos. 1; 1-1; see also Linkinski v. Experian Information Solutions, et al., Case No. 2025-25-20745-GC (71B D. Ct. Tuscola Cnty., Mich.). Plaintiff contends that Defendants violated federal law by, among other things, failing to investigate a dispute he submitted regarding his credit report. See ECF No. 1-1 at PageID.16–23. On August 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Removal, attempting to remove the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441. ECF No. 1. He contemporaneously applied to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). ECF No. 2. On August 12, 2025, this Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris for all pretrial matters. ECF No. 6. That next day, Judge Morris granted Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed IFP. ECF No. 7. On August 19, 2025, Judge Morris issued a report (R&R) recommending that this Court remand this case 71B District Court in Tuscola County, Michigan. ECF No. 9. In so doing, Judge Morris noted that 28 U.S.C. § 1441 allows only defendants to remove cases to federal court—not plaintiffs. Id. at PageID.222–23. As a result, Plaintiff’s removal was improper. Id. at PageID.223. Judge Morris provided the Parties 14 days to object, id. at PageID.223–24, but the Parties did not do so. Thus, they have forfeited their right to appeal Judge Morris’s findings. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)).

There is no clear error in Judge Morris’s R&R. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 9, is ADOPTED. Further, it is ORDERED that this case be REMANDED to the 71B District Court in Tuscola County, Michigan. Dated: September 10, 2025 s/Thomas L. Ludington THOMAS L. LUDINGTON United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

MARKEL K. LOKINSKI,

Plaintiff, Case No. 1:25-cv-12483

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington United States District Judge EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., et al., Honorable Patricia T. Morris United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. _________________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND REMANDING CASE TO 71B DISTRICT COURT

In May 2025, Plaintiff Markel K. Lokinski sued Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc., and various other Defendants in the 71B District Court in Tuscola County, Michigan. See generally ECF Nos. 1; 1-1; see also Linkinski v. Experian Information Solutions, et al., Case No. 2025-25-20745-GC (71B D. Ct. Tuscola Cnty., Mich.). Plaintiff contends that Defendants violated federal law by, among other things, failing to investigate a dispute he submitted regarding his credit report. See ECF No. 1-1 at PageID.16–23. On August 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Removal, attempting to remove the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441. ECF No. 1. He contemporaneously applied to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). ECF No. 2. On August 12, 2025, this Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris for all pretrial matters. ECF No. 6. That next day, Judge Morris granted Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed IFP. ECF No. 7. On August 19, 2025, Judge Morris issued a report (R&R) recommending that this Court remand this case 71B District Court in Tuscola County, Michigan. ECF No. 9. In so doing, Judge Morris noted that 28 U.S.C. § 1441 allows only defendants to remove cases to federal court—not plaintiffs. Id. at PageID.222–23. As a result, Plaintiff’s removal was improper. Id. at PageID.223. Judge Morris provided the Parties 14 days to object, id. at PageID.223–24, but the Parties did not do so. Thus, they have forfeited their right to appeal Judge Morris’s findings. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)).

There is no clear error in Judge Morris’s R&R. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 9, is ADOPTED. Further, it is ORDERED that this case be REMANDED to the 71B District Court in Tuscola County, Michigan. Dated: September 10, 2025 s/Thomas L. Ludington THOMAS L. LUDINGTON United States District Judge

Lokinski v. Experian Information Solution, Inc., (E.D. Mich. 2025).

Pincite

Lokinski v. Experian Information Solution, Inc. (Lokinski v. Experian Information Solution, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related