Alipio v. Winter

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedJune 29, 2009
DocketCivil Action No. 2008-1251
StatusPublished

This text of Alipio v. Winter (Alipio v. Winter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alipio v. Winter, (D.D.C. 2009).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

) ALFREDO R. ALIPIO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-1251 (JR) ) DONALD C. WINTER, ) Secretary of the Navy, ) ) Defendant. ) )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion to

dismiss.

Plaintiff is a former employee of the United States Navy at

Subic Bay, Philippines, whose formal employment discrimination

claim was dismissed on the ground that he is an alien to whom

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (“Title

VII”), does not apply.1 See Compl., Attach. (May 2, 2008 Notice

of Dismissal, DON 08-61581-00850) at 1-2. He alleges that he is

a dual citizen of the Philippines and of the United States

because he was born in 1938 in the Philippine Islands when the

Philippine Islands were a United States territory. Compl. at 6.

1 The Navy also dismissed plaintiff’s claim of discrimination on the basis of reprisal, see Compl., Attach. (Notice of Dismissal) at 2, but plaintiff does not appear to challenge this portion of the Navy’s determination.

1 In this action, plaintiff asks the Court to “confirm[] [his]

having been born a US citizen” such that the Navy “allow[s]

[him] to have access under [Title VII].” Id. at 7.

In Licudine v. Winter, 603 F. Supp. 2d 129 (D.D.C. 2009),

this Court held that a person who, like plaintiff, was born in

the Philippine Islands when the Philippines was a United States

territory is neither a citizen nor a national of United States

citizen. Id. at 135-36. Such a person, then, is an alien to

whom Title VII does not apply. Id.

The Court will grant defendant’s motion to dismiss. An

Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

JAMES ROBERTSON United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Licudine v. Winter
603 F. Supp. 2d 129 (District of Columbia, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Alipio v. Winter, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alipio-v-winter-dcd-2009.