Opinion

Poole v. Garland

Court
District Court, N.D. California
Filed
Oct 15, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 18.8%

The opinion

1

2

3

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

7 KAIRE POOLE,

Case No. 20-cv-09379-PJH

8 Plaintiff,

9 v. ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO DISMISS

10 MERRICK B. GARLAND,

Re: Dkt. No. 27

11 Defendant.

12

13

14 Defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s second amended complaint (“SAC”) came

15 on for hearing before this court on October 14, 2021. Plaintiff appeared through her

16 counsel, Michael Hawbecker. Defendant appeared through his counsel, Kenneth

17 Brakebill. Having read the papers filed by the parties and carefully considered their

18 arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby

19 GRANTS defendant’s motion, for the reasons stated at the hearing.

20 As noted at the hearing, “Title VII provides the exclusive judicial remedy for claims

21 of discrimination in federal employment.” McGee v. Dejoy, 821 F.App’x 860, 861 (9th Cir.

22 2020) (citing White v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 652 F.2d 913, 916-17 (9th Cir. 1981)); see

23 also Brown v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 824 (1976). This case involves

24 allegations of racial discrimination in federal employment. Therefore, the claims,

25 currently pleaded as violations of Title 42 U.S.C. §1981, must be re-pleaded under Title

26 VII. The court grants plaintiff leave to amend her first and second claims for hostile

27 environment and disparate treatment. In the third amended complaint, the allegations of

1 header “adverse employment actions/disparate treatment of plaintiff.” Defendant has

2 properly grouped the factual allegations found in this section of the SAC into 6

3 categories, to which the court has added a seventh. Dkt. 26 ¶¶ 72-107. Plaintiff’s third

4 claim for retaliation is dismissed with prejudice based on plaintiff’s continued failure to

5 plead facts establishing a causal nexus between her prior protected activity and the

6 conduct at issue in this lawsuit.

7 Plaintiff may file her amended complaint, complying with the guidance given on the

8 record, within 28 days of the date of this order. Defendant may respond within 28 days

9 following plaintiff’s filing.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated: October 15, 2021

12 /s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

13 United States District Judge

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.