Ondoua v. Montana State University et al

Filing 65

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 33 is GRANTED with respect to Counts 7,8,9,15,16 and 20. Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED with respect to all of the other Counts. Coun ts 7,8,9,15, and 16 is DISMISSED without prejudice. Count 20 is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MSU may renew its motion for Judgment on the Pleadings if it continues to believe that Ondoua's claims contained in Ondoua's Amended Preliminary Pretrial Statement 64 remain deficient. SEE ORDER FOR FULL DETAILS. Signed by Judge Brian Morris on 3/21/2019. (MMS)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
GREAT FALLS DIVISION
ROGER N.M. ONDOUA
Plaintiff,

CV 18-05-GF-BMM-JTJ

vs.
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY,
et. al.,

ORDER

Defendant.

Plaintiff Robert N.M. Ondoua filed his Third Amended Complaint against
Montana State University (“MSU”) on November 1, 2018. (Doc. 27.) Ondoua
alleges that MSU and ten individual MSU employees discriminated and retaliated
against him in connection with his employment. Ondoua’s Third Amended
Complaint contained twenty causes of action. Id. MSU moved for judgment on the
pleadings on December 17, 2018. (Doc. 33.) Magistrate Judge John Johnston held
a hearing on MSU’s motion on February 13, 2019. (Doc. 46.)
Defendants asserted that all twenty counts contained in Ondoua’s Third
Amended Complaint should be dismissed. Ondoua agreed that Counts 7, 8, 9, 15,
and 16, should be dismissed without prejudice. Ondoua further agreed that Count

1

20 should be dismissed with prejudice. Ondoua opposed dismissal of each
remaining count.
Judge Johnston concluded that Ondoua’s Third Amended Complaint
remained deficient. (Doc. 50 at 1.) Judge Johnston determined that the remaining
claims failed to provide MSU notice of the allegations. Id. Judge Johnston
determined that the remaining claims failed to identify specific Defendants
responsible for the conduct at issue in each claim. Id. Judge Johnston further
determined that Ondoua’s Third Amended Complaint failed to provide a short and
plain statement of the legal and factual basis for each alleged cause of action. Id. at
1-2.
Judge Johnston provided Ondoua an opportunity to cure the defects
contained in the remaining counts. Judge Johnston required Ondoua to file an
amended preliminary pretrial statement on or before March 6, 2019. Judge
Johnston required Ondoua’s amended preliminary pretrial statement to identify the
specific Defendants that are responsible for each alleged cause of action, and
provide a short and plain statement of the legal and factual basis for each alleged
cause of action. (Doc. 50 at 2.) The Court granted Ondoua’s motion for an
extension of time to file his amended preliminary pretrial statement until March 13,

2

2019. (Doc. 62.) Ondoua timely filed his Amended Preliminary Pretrial Statement.
(Doc. 64.)
MSU filed its objection to Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations
on March 12, 2019. (Doc. 63.) MSU asserts that Judge Johnston incorrectly
determined that MSU’s motion for Judgement on the Pleadings should be denied
with respect to the remaining deficient counts. MSU argues that it is entitled to
judgment on the pleadings with respect to the remaining counts. Id. at 2.
The Court reviews de novo Findings and Recommendations timely objected
to. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). “A party makes a proper objection by identifying the
parts of the judge’s disposition that the party finds objectionable and presenting
legal argument and supporting authority, such that the district court is able to
identify the issues and the reasons supporting a contrary result.” Montana
Shooting Sports Ass’n v. Holder, 2010 WL 4102940, at *2 (D. Mont. Oct. 18,
2010) (citation omitted).
Judge Johnston directed Ondoua to cure the deficiencies contained in
Ondoua’s Third Amended Complaint on or before March 13, 2019. (Docs. 50, 62.)
Judge Johnston directed Ondoua to cure these deficiencies through an amended
preliminary pretrial statement. Id. MSU asks the Court to dismiss the deficient
remaining counts based on the deficiencies contained in Ondoua’s Third Amended
3

Complaint. MSU moves the Court to dismiss these counts prior to allowing
Ondoua an opportunity to cure these defects through a preliminary pretrial
statement, as directed by Judge Johnston. MSU’s objection to Judge Johnston’s
Findings and Recommendations proves premature. The Court finds no error in
Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations. MSU may file a second motion
addressing Ondoua’s claims if it continues to believe that Ondoua’s claims
contained in his Amended Preliminary Pretrial Statement remain deficient.
IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston’s Findings and Recommendations
(Doc. 50) are ADOPTED IN FULL.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MSU may renew its motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings if it continues to believe that Ondoua’s claims
contained in Ondoua’s Amended Preliminary Pretrial Statement (Doc. 64) remain
deficient.
DATED this 21st day of March, 2019.

4