Salinas v. TKC Holdings et al

Filing 20

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER...IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff Luis S. Salinas's claims for color and gender discrimination and for a failure to rehire [ 14 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' motion for an order directing Salinas to file an amended complaint 14 is DENIED. Defendants shall file an answer to the complaint no later than May 7, 2021. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 4/26/2021. (NEP)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
LUIS S. SALINAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
TKC HOLDINGS and
KEEFE GROUP,
Defendants,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:20 CV 1846 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On December 18, 2020. Plaintiff Luis S. Salinas filed this lawsuit against
Defendants TKC Holdings and Keefe Group asserting several claims based on
employment discrimination. On March 1, 2021, TKC Holdings and Keefe Group
filed a motion to dismiss Salinas’ claims for color and gender discrimination and
for a failure to rehire. Defendants assert that Salinas failed to administratively
exhaust these claims in his Charge of Discrimination filed with the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.
Salinas’ response to the motion was due on March 15, 2021. Salinas did not
file a response to Defendants’ motion. On March 22, 2021, I issued a show cause
order directing Salinas to file a response to Defendants’ motion no later than
March 31, 2021. As of today’s date, Salinas has not filed a response to my show
cause order.

Salinas failed to raise his claims for color and gender discrimination and for
a failure to rehire in his Charge of Discrimination filed with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission. He asserts these claims under Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (Title VII) and under the Americans
With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. (ADA). Both of these statutes
require a plaintiff to exhaust his administrative remedies regarding employment
discrimination claims with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission before
filing a lawsuit in federal court. See Tyler v. Univ. of Arkansas Bd. of Trustees,
628 F.3d 980, 989 (8th Cir. 2011) (Title VII) and Moses v. Dassault Falcon JetWilmington Corp., 894 F.3d 911, 919 (8th Cir. 2018) (ADA). Salinas failed to
raise these claims in his charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission. As a result, I will grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss these claims
for Salinas’ failure to exhaust his administrative remedies.
In their motion to dismiss Defendants also requested that I order Salinas to
file an amended complaint if I granted the motion to dismiss. That is not
necessary. Defendants can file an answer based on Salinas’ original complaint.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff
Luis S. Salinas’s claims for color and gender discrimination and for a failure to
2

rehire [14] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for an order
directing Salinas to file an amended complaint [14] is DENIED. Defendants shall
file an answer to the complaint no later than May 7, 2021.

_____________________________
RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 26th day of April, 2021.

3