Hopefully, Prosper will provide an explanation of what is going on here, since it is hard to tell from what we have. It appears that Prosper filed a dismissal for an as yet unknown reason. One possibility is that the defendant convinced Prosper that she was not the borrower. That would suggest that Prosper owes the lenders a repurchase under the ID-theft guarantee, unless Prosper simply screwed up the service somehow (for example, maybe Holly Brown really was the borrower, but she moved, and Prosper served a different Holly Brown). It is also possible that the defendant convinced Prosper that it filed in the wrong courthouse, and Prosper decided to dismiss and refile. That would be a rather troubling indication of the lawyer's competence if that were the case, but easily fixed. Certainly any lender on this loan (is this one of the loans where we know the listing number?) should be contacting Prosper for an update (or a demand for repurchase). Maybe a few PM's would be in order?