Darrin Stephens v. Made to Order and Red Promotions

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: November 19, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02246
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 DARRIN STEPHENS, Case No. 2:25-cv-02246-RFB-EJY

5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

7 MADE TO ORDER and RED PROMOTIONS, 8 Defendants. 9 10 Plaintiff is appearing in this action pro se and has requested authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 11 to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff also submitted a Complaint attached to his in 12 forma pauperis application. ECF No. 1-1 13 I. In Forma Pauperis Application 14 Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is complete and demonstrates an inability 15 to prepay filing fees and costs or give security for the same. Thus, Plaintiff is granted in forma 16 pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 17 II. Screening the Complaint 18 Upon granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a court must screen the complaint 19 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). In screening the complaint, a court must identify cognizable claims 20 and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted 21 or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). 22 Dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2) incorporates the standard for failure to state 23 a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 24 (9th Cir. 2012). To survive § 1915 review, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual matter, 25 accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 26 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The court liberally construes pro se complaints and may only dismiss them 27 “if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which 1 would entitle him to relief.” Nordstrom v. Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iqbal, 2 556 U.S. at 678). 3 In considering whether the complaint is sufficient to state a claim, all allegations of material 4 fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Wyler Summit P’ship 5 v. Turner Broad. Sys. Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). Although the 6 standard under Rule 12(b)(6) does not require detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff must provide 7 more than mere labels and conclusions. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). 8 A formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action is insufficient. Id. Unless it is clear the 9 complaint’s deficiencies cannot be cured through amendment, a pro se plaintiff should be given 10 leave to amend the complaint with notice regarding the complaint’s deficiencies. Cato v. United 11 States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 12 III. Plaintiff’s Complaint 13 In his Complaint, Plaintiff generally alleges a violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights 14 Act. However, Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a cognizable claim. While Plaintiff attaches an 15 August 15, 2025 Right to Sue letter to his Complaint, demonstrating he initiated his claim within 90 16 days of receipt of the letter (ECF No. 1-2 at 1), Plaintiff does not state what claims he brought to the 17 EEOC or Nevada Equal Rights Commission thereby failing to demonstrate what claims he may 18 bring before the Court. Sommatino v. United States, 255 F.3d 704, 707 (9th Cir. 2001) (“In order to 19 bring a Title VII claim in district court, a plaintiff must first exhaust [his] administrative remedies.”). 20 As explained in Stache v. International Union of Bricklayers, 852 F.2d 1231, 1233 (9th Cir. 1988), 21 cert. denied, 493 U.S. 815 (1989) filing a charge of discrimination is a condition precedent to 22 bringing an action in federal court. Further, the federal courts will consider only those claims that 23 are like or reasonably related to the allegations in the charge. Id. at 1234. 24 Moreover, Plaintiff’s facts, even when liberally construed, do not allege a prima facie case 25 of discrimination in violation of Title VII sufficient to survive a § 1915 screening. To state a prima 26 facie claim of discrimination, Plaintiff must allege: (a) he belongs to a protected class; (b) he was 27 qualified for the job for which he applied; (c) he was subjected to an adverse employment action; 1 and (d) similarly situated employees not in his protected class received more favorable treatment. 2 See Shepard v. Marathon Staffing, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. Lexis 76097, at *5 (D. Nev. June 2, 2014) 3 (citing Moran v. Selig, 447 F.3d 748, 753 (9th Cir. 2006)). 4 The absence of any information regarding the contents of Plaintiff’s Charge of 5 Discrimination is fatal to his current claims. Further, Plaintiff fails to identify the protected classes 6 to which he belongs and on which he sues. Ultimately, Plaintiff fails to allege facts necessary to 7 establish a prima facie claim of discrimination. Thus, the Court finds Plaintiff’s Complaint cannot 8 proceed as currently pleaded; however, leave to amend is granted below. 9 IV. ORDER 10 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma 11 Pauperis (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED. Plaintiff will not be required to pay the filing fee in this action. 12 This Order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis does not extend to the issuance of subpoenas 13 or other costs associated with discovery. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court must file Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF 15 No. 1-1) on the docket. 16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed without prejudice, but 17 with leave to amend. If Plaintiff so chooses, he may file an amended complaint no later than 18 December 22, 2025. If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, it must be titled “AMENDED 19 COMPLAINT.” 20 Plaintiff’s amended complaint, if filed, must include all claims on which he seeks to proceed. 21 The amended complaint must include facts demonstrating he filed a Charge of Discrimination 22 against each Defendant named in his Complaint. Plaintiff must also allege sufficient facts 23 establishing one or more violation of Title VII. Plaintiff must identify the protected class or classes 24 to which he belongs, what conduct about which he complains was allegedly prompted by 25 discriminatory hostility toward that class, and how he was treated differently than individuals outside 26 his protected class. In sum, Plaintiff’s statement of facts must include sufficient facts to support a 27 1 claim or discrimination based on his sex, race, color, religion or national origin, which are the 2 protected characteristics under Title VII. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that failure to timely comply with this Order will result in a 4 recommendation to dismiss this action in its entirety, without prejudice. 5 DATED this 19th day of November, 2025. 6

8 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27