Coleman v. Correct Care Solutions

Filing 10

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice. See Stewart v. Ragon, 447 Fed.Appx. 756 (8th Cir. 2012) (affirming district courts pre-service dismissal, with prejudice, where Plaintiff fa iled to show cause why matter should not be dismissed for failure to file suit within 90 days of receipt of right-to-sue letter from EEOC). A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
RUTH C. COLEMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:13CV82

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On October 11, 2013, this
court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for her
failure to file suit within 90 days of her receipt of a right-to-sue letter from the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”).1 (Filing No. 8 at CM/ECF p. 1.)
The court gave Plaintiff until October 31, 2013, to show that equitable or exceptional
circumstances exist that warrant tolling of the 90-day period. (Id.) The court warned
Plaintiff that failure to do so would result in this matter being dismissed without
further notice.
On October 18, 2013, Plaintiff filed a response to the court’s Memorandum and
Order in which she reiterated that she was subjected to age discrimination. (Filing
No. 9.) She does not set forth any facts or arguments to show that equitable or
exceptional circumstances exist that warrant the tolling of the 90-day period. As
such, because Plaintiff failed to file suit within 90 days of her receipt of a right-to-sue
letter, and because she failed to show that equitable or exceptional circumstances
exist that warrant tolling of the 90-day time period,

1

This court’s records reflect that Plaintiff received her right-to-sue notice on January 12, 2012
(see Filing No. 9 at CM/ECF p. 4), and she filed this suit more than one year later on March 12, 2013
(see Filing No. 1).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed with prejudice. See Stewart v. Ragon,
447 Fed.Appx. 756 (8th Cir. 2012) (affirming district court’s pre-service dismissal,
with prejudice, where Plaintiff failed to show cause why matter should not be
dismissed for failure to file suit within 90 days of receipt of right-to-sue letter from
EEOC).
2.
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this
Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 16th day of December, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ John M. Gerrard
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District
Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third
parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no
agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for
the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
2