Sanchez v. Brennan

Filing 42

MINUTE ORDER; 37 Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 11/23/15.(morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-01523-MJW
ROBERT W. SANCHEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
MEGAN J. BRENNAN, Postmaster General, U.S. Postal Service,
Defendant.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration (Docket No.
37) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is granted insofar as it
requests reconsideration; it is denied insofar as it seeks a new result.
Reconsideration is appropriate in this instance because the Court f ailed to
address one of Defendant’s arguments. See Servants of Paraclete v. Does, 204 F.3d
1005, 1012 (10th Cir. 2000) (“[A] motion for reconsideration is appropriate where the
court has misapprehended the facts, a party’s position, or the controlling law.”). The
Court therefore grants reconsideration and, now, considers Defendant’s argument that
Plaintiff failed to plausibly plead a claim for disability discrimination.
The Court nonetheless rejects Defendant’s argument as to plausibly pleading
disability discrimination. While the handwritten portions of Plaintiff’s complaint leave
much to be desired, the documents attached to the Complaint are part of the pleading
under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(c). Those documents
provide more than enough detail for the Court to infer that (1) Plaintiff is a member in a
class action in which the elements of disability discrimination have been plausibly
asserted, and (2) Plaintiff individually has a strong basis for his claims, having both
received a previous judgment from the EEOC and participated actively as a witness and
source of discovery in the current class action. Given Plaintiff’s pro se status, and the
requirement that this Court draw all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff’s favor at the
pleading stage, the Court finds that the claim has been plausibly alleged.
Date: November 23, 2015