Guridy v. American Express Company, 1:24-cv-02251

Plaintiff, Leidy V. Guridy, applied online for an American Express platinum rewards credit card in December 2023.
Guridy voluntarily offered an unspecified security interest as part of the application process.
American Express denied her application for reasons not disclosed to Guridy.
Guridy, proceeding pro se, alleged breach of contract, federal securities law violations, and unjust enrichment.
She sought issuance of the credit card, monetary damages, and other compensation.
The court granted Guridy's motion to proceed in forma pauperis due to her limited income but reviewed her complaint for legal sufficiency before service.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Breach of contract	Amex breached by not providing the credit card or compensation for her security interest	No valid contract existed	No plausible contract or breach alleged; claim dismissed
Violation of federal securities	Amex securitized/traded her application without consent or compensation	Allegations are conclusory	Allegations insufficient; claim dismissed
Unjust enrichment	Amex profited from her offered security interest without compensation	Unclear/unsupported assertions	Allegations fail basic pleading standards; claim dismissed
In forma pauperis status	Inability to pay filing fee confirmed by low income	N/A	Motion granted, but case dismissed under initial review

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (articulates standards for complaint plausibility)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (requires complaints to state a plausible claim)
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002) (complaints must provide fair notice of claims)
Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364 (1982) (pro se complaints are held to less stringent standards)
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) (liberal construction given to pro se pleadings)