Williams v. HP Enterprise Services Llc

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

N.D. Fla.February 17, 2017

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION CASE NO. 4:17-cv-82-RH-CAS BRENDA J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. HP ENTERPRISE SERVICES, LLC, Defendant. ____________________________/ DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW Defendant HP Enterprise Services, LLC (“HP”), by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully moves pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for dismissal of Plaintiff’s purported claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. In further support hereof, HP states: STATEMENT OF RELIEF REQUESTED Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Defendant moves the Court for an Order dismissing Plaintiff’s purported claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and for such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 1 of 7 2 BASIS FOR RELIEF REQUESTED Plaintiff’s Complaint, to the extent Plaintiff purports to bring it pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 1981, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because the Complaint offers insufficient factual and legal allegations to support a putative claim of race discrimination. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Plaintiff filed her Complaint in Florida’s Second Judicial Circuit Court in and for Leon County, Florida. 4. HP was served with the Complaint on January 12, 2017, and timely filed a Notice of Removal with this Court on February 10, 2017. 5. The one-count Complaint alleges that Plaintiff is a member of a protected class because of her actual or perceived disability. Compl., ¶ 3. 6. Count I of the Complaint alleges that this is an action against HP for disability discrimination brought under Chapter 760, Fla. Stat., and 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq. Compl., ¶ 15. 7. Specifically, Count I alleges that Plaintiff has been the victim of discrimination on the basis of her disability or perceived disability. Compl., ¶ 16. 8. However, paragraph 1 of the Complaint asserts that this action is also brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. But the Complaint fails to plead any facts related to such a claim. 9. The Complaint’s only reference to race is in paragraph 6, which merely alleges that Plaintiff is African American. See Compl., ¶ 6. Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 2 of 7 3 MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION I. STANDARD OF REVIEW A. Motion to Dismiss Rule 8(a)(2) requires pleadings to contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). To withstand a motion to dismiss, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. “[A] formulaic recitation of a cause of action’s elements will not do.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 545. “[U]nadorned, the defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me- accusation[s],” “labels and conclusions,” “formulaic recitation[s] of the elements of a cause of action,” and “naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement” are insufficient. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quotations omitted). II. ARGUMENT A. The Complaint Fails to State a Putative Race Claim Under the Pleading Requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under Rule 12(b)(6), a court should dismiss a complaint if it fails to “state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). The minimal pleading requirement of Rule 8 is that a complaint must include “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 3 of 7 4 Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 561-63 (2007). This facial plausibility standard is met “when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1953 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 557). To the extent that a complaint pleads facts that are “merely consistent with” a defendant’s liability, it “stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557 (internal quotation marks omitted). As the Supreme Court held in Twombly, the Rule 8 pleading standard demands “more than an unadorned, the- defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S. Ct. at 1949 (citing Twombly, 544 at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955). Conclusory statements and unsupported inferences are not sufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Northern Trust Co. v. Peters, 69 F.3d 123, 129 (11th Cir. 1995); see also Quality Foods de Centro America, 711 F.2d 989, 995 (11th Cir. 1983). Indeed, factual allegations “must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . .”. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 545, 127 S. Ct. at 1959. Here, the Complaint does not meet the Rule 8 pleading standard for a putative claim of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. That statute applies to claims of discrimination on account of race. E.g., Lopez v. Target Corp., 676 F.3d 1230, 1233 (11th Cir. 2012); Jackson v. BellSouth Telecomms., 372 F.3d 1250, 1270 (11th Cir. 2004). “To state a claim of race discrimination Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 4 of 7 5 under § 1981, plaintiffs must allege facts establishing: (1) that the plaintiff is a member of a racial minority; (2) that the defendant intended to discriminate on the basis of race; and (3) that the discrimination concerned one or more of the activities enumerated in the statute.” Jackson, 372 F.3d at 1270 (dismissing claim on grounds that plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to support defendant’s intent to discriminate on basis of race). The Complaint is devoid of any factual and legal allegations that would permit an inference that HP is liable for race discrimination. Indeed, Plaintiff does not even accuse HP of wrongdoing on account of her race. The Complaint’s only reference to race is in paragraph 6, which merely alleges that Plaintiff is African American. See Compl., ¶ 6. Also, the Complaint fails to allege facts that relate in any way to any intent to discriminate on the basis of race. Thus, insofar as any putative race discrimination is concerned, the Complaint falls far “short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.” See Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557. And, the mere allegation that Plaintiff is African American does not state a claim or entitle her to relief for race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. See Jackson, 372 F.3d at 1270. Because the Complaint fails to allege any facts or legal elements to state or support any putative claim for race discrimination against Plaintiff, the Complaint must be dismissed to the extent it purports to assert a 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim. Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 5 of 7 6 WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant this motion and dismiss the Complaint to the extent it purports to assert a 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim. LOCAL RULE 7.1(f) CERTIFICATE Undersigned counsel certifies that, pursuant to the word court of the word-processing system used to prepare this motion and incorporated memorandum, the total number of words in this document is less than 8,000. Respectfully submitted: /s/ Gregory J. Trask ____________________________ Peter W. Homer Florida Bar No. 291250 Gregory J. Trask Florid Bar No. 0055883 HOMER BONNER JACOBS 1200 Four Seasons Tower 1441 Brickell Avenue Miami, FL 33131 Tel: 305-350-5100 Email: phomer@homerbonner.com Email: gtrask@homerbonner.com Counsel for Defendant Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 6 of 7 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 17th day of February 2017, I filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of Court via CM/ECF and certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the below Service List by NEF electronic mail. /s/ Gregory J. Trask _________________ Gregory J. Trask SERVICE LIST Marie A. Mattox, Esq. Marie A. Mattox, P.A. 310 East Bradford Road Tallahassee, FL 32303 Email: marie@mattoxlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Case 4:17-cv-00082-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 02/17/17 Page 7 of 7