United States District Court, D. Arizona
HONORABLE RANER C. COLLINS SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT
January 10, 2019, Defendant Scottsdale Community College
(“SCC”) filed a Motion to Dismiss. (Doc. 14.)
Plaintiff did not respond. On February 12, 2019, Defendant
filed a Motion for Summary Disposition. (Doc. 15.) Again,
Plaintiff did not respond. The Court ordered Plaintiff to
show cause why he had not responded to the motions and warned
Plaintiff that failing to respond could result in dismissal
of his case. (Doc. 17.) Plaintiff then filed a motion for an
extension of time to file a response because he claimed he
had not received the motions. (Doc. 18.) Without explanation,
Plaintiff also attached an Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission Intake Questionnaire, a letter, and a series of
emails. Id. Plaintiff's deadline for filing a
response has passed, and no response has been filed. The
Court has reviewed the filings and will grant Defendant's
Complaint alleges that SCC discriminated against him on the
basis of age and race. (Doc. 1.) He claims that he sought
employment as a teacher. Id. An unnamed Culinary
Director told Plaintiff he was too old, lied about hiring
procedures, sent defamatory emails to hiring staff, harassed
him, and filed false evaluations. Id. Apparently
Plaintiff was hired, because his employment was then
terminated and given to another instructor. Id.
Standard of Review
motion under 12(b)(6) must contain a “short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled
to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). While Rule 8 does not
require detailed factual allegations, “it demands more
than an unadorned, the defendant unlawfully-harmed-me
accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009). “[A] complaint must contain sufficient
factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.'”
Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible
“when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows
the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant
is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. The
complaint must contain more than “a statement of facts
that merely creates a suspicion [of] a legally cognizable
right of action.” Bell Atlantic Corp., 550
U.S. at 555. Furthermore, “[t]hreadbare recitals of the
elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory
statements, do not suffice.” Id.
whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief [is]
. . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing
court to draw on its judicial experience and common
sense.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. So, although a
plaintiff's specific factual allegations may be
consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess
whether there are other “more likely
explanations” for a defendant's conduct.
Id. at 681.
plaintiff “fails to state a claim on which relief may
be granted, ” the District Court must dismiss the
claim. 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). But, a
“complaint [filed by a pro se litigant] ‘must be
held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers.'” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627
F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)). While
dismissal is appropriate if the complaint's deficiencies
cannot be cured by amendment, if the pleading can be remedied
through the addition of facts, the claimant should be granted
an opportunity to amend a complaint prior to final dismissal.
Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir.
Discrimination and Retaliation Claims
potentially raises three claims in his Complaint: age
discrimination, race discrimination, and retaliation. A
complaint of racial discrimination in employment must plead
facts supporting the conclusion that a plaintiff: (1) belongs
to a protected class; “(2) . . . performed . . . [his]
job satisfactorily; (3) . . . suffered an adverse employment
action; and (4) . . . [was] treated . . . differently than a
similarly situated employee who does not belong to the same
protected class as . . . plaintiff.” Cornwell v.
Electra Cent. Credit Union, 439 F.3d 1018, 1028 (9th
a claimant can establish a claim of age discrimination if he
pleads facts demonstrating: (1) he is over forty years old;
(2) he suffered an adverse employment action; (3) he was
qualified for the position; and (4) he was replaced with a
younger person with similar qualifications or under facts
suggesting discrimination. See Diaz v. Eagle Produce
Ltd., 521 F.3d 1201, 1207-08 (9th Cir. 2008).
“to establish a prima facie case of retaliation, a
plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) a protected activity; (2) an
adverse employment action; and (3) a causal link between the
protected activity and the adverse employment action.”
Cornwell, 439 F.3d at 1034-35.
Motion to Dismiss
Motion to Dismiss argues that SCC is not a jural entity and
is therefore not a properly named defendant. Furthermore,
Plaintiff has pleaded insufficient facts to ...