Shoals v. Morris, City of

Filing 55

ORDER by District Judge Ronald A. White affirming and adopting 51 Report and Recommendation; granting 34 Motion for Summary Judgment, case dismissed. (tls, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
ISHANTA SHOALS,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. CIV-22-266-RAW-GLJ

CITY OF MORRIS, OKLAHOMA,
Defendant.

ORDER
Before the court is the Report and Recommendation (hereinafter “R&R”) entered by
Magistrate Judge Jackson [Docket No. 51], recommending that the Defendant’s motion for
summary judgment [Docket No. 34] * be granted and the case be dismissed. Plaintiff filed an
objection to the R&R [Docket No. 52], and the Defendant filed a response to Plaintiff’s
objection. [Docket No. 53]. The standard of review is de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
Plaintiff argues that the R&R erred in finding that: (1) she failed to exhaust her Title VII
claims related to termination; (2) she did not put forth evidence supporting an inference to sex,
gender, or race discrimination; (3) the Defendant had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for
failing to promote her; (4) she offered no direct evidence of retaliation; and (5) she did not
present a triable issue as to the Defendant’s motive regarding a hostile work environment.
As to the Magistrate Judge’s finding that she failed to exhaust her administrative
remedies with respect to her termination, Plaintiff simply incorporates her previous argument
Plaintiff’s response to the summary judgment motion is at Docket No. 42; the Defendant’s reply
is at Docket No. 47.
*

stating that her “charge of discrimination was perfected after she was terminated” without
including any supporting evidence. Likewise, as to Plaintiff’s other four objections, she
reiterates the brief arguments made in her response to the summary judgment motion. Defendant
argues that the R&R is correct and should be adopted by this court. The court agrees.
After a de novo review, the court finds that the R&R [Docket No. 51] is well-supported
by the evidence and the prevailing legal authority. The record in this case shows that there is no
genuine dispute as to any material fact and the Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of
law. Accordingly, the R&R is hereby affirmed and adopted as this court’s Findings and Order.
The motion for summary judgment [Docket No. 34] is hereby GRANTED, and this case is
DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 27th day of March, 2024.

______________________________________
THE HONORABLE RONALD A. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

2