Wood v. State of Alabama, 187th Fighter Wing, Fire Department(JOINT ASSIGN)

Filing 9

ORDER granting 5 Motion to Dismiss and that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice, as further set out in order. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 9/29/2015. (wcl, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION MICHAEL CODY WOOD, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, 187th FIGHTER WING, FIRE DEPARTMENT, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 2:15-CV-273-WKW [WO] ORDER On April 24, 2015, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against Defendant pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., asserting claims of discrimination concerning the denial of promotions. On September 1, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), contending that the State Military Department, not the entity or entities named, is Plaintiff’s employer for purposes of Title VII and that the Complaint does not “contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). Plaintiff did not file a response to the motion to dismiss, although given an opportunity to do so. (See Briefing Order (Doc. # 8).) After careful consideration, the court finds that the arguments and authority cited in Defendant’s motion to dismiss are well founded and that Defendant’s motion to dismiss is due to be granted for the reasons articulated in its motion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. # 5) is GRANTED and that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate final judgment will be entered. DONE this 29th day of September, 2015. /s/ W. Keith Watkins CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?