Odem-Raven v. Kraftman Federal Credit Union

Filing 22

JUDGMENT ADOPTING 21] Report and Recommendation. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 5] filed by Defendant Kraftman Federal Credit Union is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. To the extent that Defendant mov ed for dismissal based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), the motion is DENIED. To the extent that Defendant moved for dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be gran ted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs claims for hostile work environment and failure to accommodate religious practices (except for her name change) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and her claims under the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law, La. Rev. Stat. § 23:332 are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Robert G James on 6/20/16. (crt,DickersonSld, D)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION

ADRIA M. RAVEN

*

CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-2810

VERSUS

*

JUDGE ROBERT G. JAMES

KRAFTMAN FEDERAL CREDIT
UNION

*

MAG. JUDGE KAREN L. HAYES

JUDGMENT
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge having been considered, no
objections thereto having been filed, and finding that same is supported by the law and the record
in this matter,
IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No.
5] filed by Defendant Kraftman Federal Credit Union is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN
PART. To the extent that Defendant moved for dismissal based on a lack of subject matter
jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), the motion is DENIED. To the
extent that Defendant moved for dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the motion is GRANTED.
Plaintiff’s claims for hostile work environment and failure to accommodate religious practices
(except for her name change) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq., and her claims under the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law, La. Rev. Stat. §
23:332 are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

MONROE, LOUISIANA, this 20th day of June, 2016.