Jada Orr v. Calavan Kia of West Atlanta

── Jada Orr v. Calavan Kia of West Atlanta ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: June 09, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-10622 Document: 53-1 Date Filed: 06/09/2026 Page: 1 of 6 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-10622 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ JADA M. ORR, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus HYUNDAI CAPITAL AMERICA, d.b.a. Kia Finance America, Defendant, KIA FINANCE AMERICA, CALAVAN KIA OF WEST ATLANTA, Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-00334-JPB ____________________ Before LUCK, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 25-10622 Document: 53-1 Date Filed: 06/09/2026 Page: 2 of 6 2 Opinion of the Court 25-10622 PER CURIAM: Jada Orr, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s de- nial of her motion to amend her complaint. Orr’s suit arises out of her purchase of a car from Calavan Kia of West Atlanta, a car deal- ership. She brought a total of seventeen claims against Calavan and Kia Finance America, a financial services company, alleging viola- tions of the Truth in Lending Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Credit Billing Act, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, as well as breach of contract. The district court dismissed with preju- dice all of Orr’s claims except for breach of contract, which it dis- missed without prejudice. The district court also denied Orr’s mo- tion to file a third amended complaint, holding that amendment was futile because her claims were legally and factually baseless. On appeal, Orr argues that the district court should have granted her motion to amend and that it erred in dismissing her federal claims with prejudice. We affirm. I. Orr purchased a car from Calavan, which she financed through Kia Finance. She eventually sued both, alleging that the financial arrangement violated federal and state law. After Orr filed two amended complaints, Calavan and Kia Finance separately moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Orr subsequently moved to file a third amended complaint. After exhaustively reviewing Orr’s arguments, the magistrate judge rec- ommended dismissing her claims and denying her motion to amend. He also concluded that Orr’s proposed third amended USCA11 Case: 25-10622 Document: 53-1 Date Filed: 06/09/2026 Page: 3 of 6 25-10622 Opinion of the Court 3 complaint “merely rehashe[d]” the second amended complaint. Doc. 60 at 31. The magistrate judge observed that Orr’s third amended complaint relied on the same exhibits contained in her initial disclosures and did not introduce new facts or arguments. Because amendment would be futile, he recommended denying the motion to amend and dismissing with prejudice. Id. at 32. After Orr objected, the district court adopted the report and recommendation in part. It agreed that all of Orr’s federal claims were due to be dismissed with prejudice, but held that her breach of contrac