Adams v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Opinion
FILED JUL 2 3 2012 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia
Dale B. Adams, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) V. ) Civil Action No. 12 1201 ) Equal Employment ) Opportunity Commission et a!., ) ) Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are plaintiffs complaint brought pro se and application to proceed in
forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint dismissed. Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915~e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss a case "at any time [it] determines that ...
the action ... fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)
(2)(B)(ii).
Plaintiff, a resident of Harrison, Arkansas, sues the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission ("EEOC") and its Chairperson for the alleged wrongful processing of his grievances
against Tysons Foods. "[N]o cause of action against the EEOC exists for challenges to its
processing of a claim." Smith v. Casellas, 119 F.3d 33, 34 (D.C. Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118
S.Ct. 386 (1997). Rather, "Congress intended the private right of action ... under which an
aggrieved employee may bring a Title VII action directly against his or her employer [] to serve
as the remedy for any improper handling of a discrimination charge by the EEOC." Id.
Accordingly, the complaint must be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this
Memorandum Opinion.
tl 3
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Adams v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Adams v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.