Diamantoulis v. Qwest Communications

Filing 67

ORDER ADOPTING 64 Report and Recommendations, It is further ordered that dfts qwest motion for summary jgm is granted. Jgm shall enter accordingly. Signed by Judge Frank R Zapata on 09/30/10. (LMF)

Download PDF
Diamantoulis v. Qwest Communications Doc. 67 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 vs. Qwest Communications, Inc. Defendant. Maria Diamantoulis, Plaintiffs, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 07-272-TUC-FRZ (JCG) ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Pending before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge recommending that the Court grant Defendant Quest Communications, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment. This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Guerin for pretrial proceedings and report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and LRCiv 72.1 and LRCiv 72.2 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Magistrate Judge Guerin issued her Report and Recommendation on July 1, 2010, recommending that this Court, after an independent review of the record, grant summary judgment in favor of Defendant Qwest Communications and dismiss this action with prejudice. Before the Court for review, in addition to the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's objections thereto and Defendant's response to the objections, are Defendant's motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff's response in opposition and Defendant's reply. Dockets.Justia.com 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 The Report and Recommendation includes a thorough history and factual background of the adverse actions at issue and an in-depth analysis of the legal issues and authority presented. Magistrate Judge Guerin specifically found that Defendant is entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff's claim for gender discrimination because, even though the actions complained of by Plaintiff may constitute adverse employment actions under controlling law, Defendant has articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for those actions which Plaintiff has failed to prove are a pretext for discrimination. In regard to Plaintiff's claim of retaliation, Magistrate Judge Guerin also found that Defendant articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for denying Plaintiff overtime and failing to provide a light duty assignment in the office and Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that those stated reasons are pretextual, and thus, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of fact with respect to her retaliation claim. Plaintiff filed her objections to the Report and Recommendation, disputing the findings of the Magistrate Judge, and contend, summarily, that the "legitimate reasons" for the Defendant's actions do not withstand scrutiny and that Magistrate Judge Guerin applied the incorrect analysis in her determinations. The Court finds, after careful consideration of the matters presented and an independent review of the record herein, including Plaintiff's Objections to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation and Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Objections to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, that Plaintiff has failed to prove a pretext for discrimination and to demonstrate genuine issues of material fact with respect to her claim of retaliation, and that Defendant's are accordingly entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Guerin's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 64] is hereby ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law by this Court; -2- 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 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Qwest's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 58] is GRANTED; Judgment shall enter accordingly. DATED this 30th day of September, 2010. -3-

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?