Abell v. United States Department of the Interior et al
Filing
27
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS (Docket No. 16 ) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 16 ) is GRANTED. The DOI and the BLM are dismissed from this case. Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF IDAHO
Case No.: 2:17-cv-00531-REB
LEANN ABELL,
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff,
vs.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR, RYAN ZINKE, Secretary; BUREAU
OF LAND MANAGEMENT,
(Docket No. 16)
Defendants.
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 16). Having
carefully considered the record and otherwise being fully advised, the undersigned enters the
following Memorandum Decision and Order:
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff Leann Abell filed suit alleging age discrimination in her employment at the
Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”), naming three defendants: (1) the Department of Interior
(“DOI”), (2) the BLM, and (3) Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. Through their Motion to
Dismiss, Defendants argue that the DOI and the BLM should be dismissed from the case, leaving
Secretary Zinke as the only proper defendant. See generally Defs.’ Mem. ISO MTD (Docket
No. 16-1). The Court agrees.
Addressing the question of whether the DOI and the BLM (as distinct entities) should be
named defendants (along with Secretary Zinke), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c) states:
Within 90 days of receipt of notice of final action taken by a department, agency,
or unit referred to in subsection (a), or by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission upon an appeal from a decision or order of such department, agency,
or unit on a complaint of discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER -- 1
national origin, brought pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, Executive Order
11478 or any succeeding Executive orders, or after one hundred and eighty days
from the filing of the initial charge with the department, agency, or unit or with the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on appeal from a decision or order of
such department, agency, or unit until such time as final action may be taken by a
department, agency, or unit, an employee or applicant for employment, if aggrieved
by the final disposition of his complaint, or by the failure to take final action on his
complaint, may file a civil action as provided in section 2000e-5 of this title, in
which civil action the head of the department, agency, or unit, as appropriate, shall
be the defendant.
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c) (emphasis added). Defendants submit that this provision applies to
Plaintiff’s claims of age discrimination and, in turn, “[o]nly the head of the agency or department
may be sued, and only in his official capacity” – not the department/unit itself. Defs.’ Mem. ISO
MTD, p. 3 (citing Williams v. Chu, 641 F. Supp. 2d 31, 34 (D.D.C. 2009); Romain v. Shear, 799
F.2d 1416, 1418 (9th Cir. 1986)). Defendants therefore argue that the only proper defendant here
is Secretary Zinke and that the DOI and the BLM must be dismissed. See id.
Plaintiff does not dispute 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c)’s application here, but explains that
“there is nothing that would connect Mr. Zinke to Ms. Abell’s employment at BLM, but for Mr.
Zinke’s position as head of the Department of Interior, of which BLM is an arm.” Pl.’s Opp. to
MTD, p. 2 (Docket No. 18). Plaintiff goes on to state that a suit against Secretary Zinke in his
official capacity is also a suit against the DOI and the BLM such that, “[w]hether the department,
agency or unit is named additionally, is a distinction without a difference.” Id. at p. 4.
Plaintiff’s concerns in these respects are without traction, particularly when considering
that the operative statute unequivocally states that in cases such as this, “the head of the
department, agency, or unit . . . shall be the defendant.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c). With this in
mind, only Secretary Zinke in the proper defendant; the DOI and the BLM are dismissed. There
is no amendment to the Complaint that could cure this defect and allow the DOI and the BLM to
remain as defendants. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is therefore granted in these respects.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER -- 2
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
(Docket No. 16) is GRANTED. The DOI and the BLM are dismissed from this case.
DATED: November 27, 2018
_________________________
Ronald E. Bush
Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER -- 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?