Taylor v. AFS Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 26

ORDER granting Plaintiff's 25 Motion for clarity regarding the Court's order. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 3/29/10. (DTN)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Billy Taylor, Plaintiff, vs. AFS Technologies, Inc.; Kurien Jacob; Walter Barandarian; Kimberly Curtis; Rebecca Barr; Andi Romano; and the Argentum Group, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-09-2567-PHX-DGC ORDER Plaintiff brought this employment law action by filing a pro se complaint against Defendants on December 8, 2009. Dkt. #1. The complaint asserts race discrimination and retaliation claims under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. 1981 and a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). Id. 45-59. On March 24, 2010, the Court issued an order granting the parties' motions to dismiss. Dkt. #24. Plaintiff has filed a motion for clarification of that order. Dkt. #25. The Court will grant the motion. The individual Defendants obtained dismissal of the Title VII claims asserted against them on the ground that individual employees may not be held liable under Title VII. Dkt. ##12 at 7, 24 at 4. Plaintiff seeks clarification as to whether his 1981 claims against the individual Defendants can move forward. Dkt. #25 at 1. Plaintiff states that the parties 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 "will undoubtedly interpret the [March 24 order] is such a light that will be favorable to their position thus creating further ambiguity between the parties." Id. at 1-2. The individual Defendants did not seek dismissal of the 1981 claims. See Dkt. #12. Those claims remain in the case and may move forward. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for clarity regarding the Court's order (Dkt. #25) is granted as set forth above. DATED this 29th day of March, 2010. -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?