Opinion
No. 1:00CV01018
November 15, 2002
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Exhibit A [Doc. #13]. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Exhibit A is GRANTED.
I.
Plaintiff Naomi Mandsager is a former graduate student and employee of The University of North Carolina at Greensboro ("UNCG"). Ms. Mandsager has filed suit against UNCG and Defendants Borders and Bartel alleging violations of (1) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (2) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (3) 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and (4) violations of North Carolina state law. Ms. Mandsager claims that she was subject to a hostile educational and working environment and that she suffered retaliation when she complained about this environment. Ms. Mandsager also seeks relief for emotional distress.
Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1), 12(b)(2), and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendants filed an Exhibit attachment to these Motions. Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Strike this Exhibit.
II.
Rule 12(b) provides that if "matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56." Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 12(b). The Fourth Circuit has held that "a court may consider [exhibits] in determining whether to dismiss the complaint because it was integral to and explicitly relied on in the complaint and because the plaintiffs do not challenge its authenticity." Phillips v. LCI Int'l, Inc., 190 F.3d 609, 618 (1999). The Phillips court considered a news article that contained the statement that served as the basis for the plaintiff's claim for fraudulent misrepresentation.
In order for this Court to consider Exhibit A, three different requirements must be satisfied. First, the documents must be integral to the complaint. Second, the documents must be explicitly relied on in the complaint. Third, the authenticity of the documents must not be challenged. In this case, Ms. Mandsager's complaint makes reference to the documents contained in Exhibit A. However, the documents do not appear to be integral to the complaint and are not explicitly relied on in the complaint as the basis for the plaintiff's cause of action. Furthermore, in its Brief in Support of Motion to Strike, Ms. Mandsager states that Exhibit A is not of unquestioned authenticity. [Doc. #13, pg. 3].
III.
The Motion to Strike [Doc. #13] is Granted. The Motions to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) will be decided without reference to the documents contained in Exhibit A.