United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter comes before the Court on Defendants Danielle Dang,
Simratpal Singh, and On Bong Wong's (collectively,
“Individual Defendants”) motion to dismiss (Dkt.
No. 25). Having thoroughly considered the parties'
briefing and the relevant record, the Court hereby GRANTS the
motion for the reasons explained herein.
Chris Onochie is a former employee of the United States
Postal Service (“USPS”). (See generally
Dkt. No. 3.) Individual Defendants were Plaintiff's
supervisors at USPS. (See id.; Dkt. No. 25 at 1.) In
his complaint, Plaintiff asserts the following claim:
Plaintiff seeks damages due to being discriminated again[st]
in violation of Title VII because the defendants felt
Plaintiff was not carrying his load while at work. Plaintiff
injured his back and could not keep up. Defendants, his
Supervisors, refused to give him a slip to take to the
doctor. Plaintiff felt that he had no option but to quit to
seek medical attention, which he did.
(Dkt. No. 3 at 4.) Plaintiff indicated that he seeks the
When he asked for his job back, the answer was NO. The doctor
determined that he injured his back. For the unfair treatment
of [Plaintiff, ] he is seeking damages for [being] forc[ed]
to continue working while injured, losing his job[, ] and
[Plaintiff] feels discriminated against; he is seeking $250,
(Id. at 5.)
brings claims against Individual Defendants, the Postmaster
General, and Uhang Lee. (See id.) Individual
Defendants move the Court to dismiss the lawsuit against
themselves pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 25.) Plaintiff failed to
respond to Individual Defendants' motion to dismiss.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) Legal
defendant may move to dismiss a complaint that “fail[s]
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). To survive a motion to dismiss, a
complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as
true, to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its
face. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78
(2009). A claim has facial plausibility 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. at 678. A plaintiff is
obligated to provide grounds for his or her entitlement to
relief that amount to more than labels and conclusions or a
formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 545
(2007). “[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does
not require ‘detailed factual allegations,' but it
demands more than an unadorned,
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly,
550 U.S. at 555).
a party fails to file papers in opposition to a motion, such
failure may be considered by the court as an admission that
the motion has merit.” W.D. Wash. Local Civ. R.
Plaintiff's complaint broadly, the only claims that
Plaintiff could be asserting are for disability
discrimination or age discrimination. (See Dkt. No.