Evangelou v. Dist. of Columbia

1 Citing brief

  1. Podliska v. U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi et al

    MOTION to Dismiss Counts IV and V of the Complaint

    Filed February 5, 2016

    ¶ 108, does not satisfy the factual pleading standard announced by the Supreme Court in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), 30 But even if Mr. Podliska’s reemployment application actually had been rejected, “a single rejection alone is insufficient to establish that the Plaintiff’s ability to seek employment was seriously affected or destroyed.” Evangelou v. Dist. of Columbia, 63 F. Supp. 3d 96, 104 (D.D.C. 2014); accord McGinnis, 65 F. Supp. 3d at 215 (plaintiff alleged that she unsuccessfully “ha[d] applied for numerous positions in law enforcement” (quotation marks omitted)); Alexis, 44 F. Supp. 2d at 342 (rejecting claim where plaintiff “provide[d] the court with no evidence illustrating either the number or nature of his attempts to obtain employment either within his chosen field or outside of it”); see also McCormick, 752 F.3d at 989 (plaintiff cited “testimony to the effect that he can never again be employed in the corrections field”). Case 1:15-cv-02037-RDM Document 23 Filed 02/05/16 Page 53 of 69 34 and Bell Atlantic Corporation v Twombly, 550 U.S. 554 (2007).