Glymph v. CT Corporation Systems

Opinion

2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 LAFFON GLYMPH, 9 Case No. 2:21-cv-01704-JHC Plaintiff, 10 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT v. COMPUCOM SYSTEMS, INC.’S 11 RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS CT CORPORATION SYSTEMS and PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 12 COMPUCOM, PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) 13 Defendants.

14 15 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant CompuCom Systems, Inc.’s Renewed 16 Motion to Dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Dkt. # 23. The motion is unopposed. Having 17 reviewed and considered the moving papers and the remainder of the file herein, the Court hereby 18 ORDERS as follows: 19 Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is subject to dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) 20 because it fails to set forth facts sufficient to establish any plausible claim for relief. See Ashcroft 21 v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Plaintiff’s 22 Amended Complaint (Dkt. # 22) fails to allege any causal connection between her exercise of her 23 rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and her discharge from Defendant. And 24 at best, it makes only conclusory allegations that Defendant willfully violated the FMLA in 25 connection with the discharge. Because Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to plausibly allege 26 1 || facts rising to the level of a willful violation of the FMLA by Defendant, Plaintiff has failed to 2 || bring this lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations, and the suit is therefore untimely. 3 Therefore, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the Motion is GRANTED. 4 || Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 5 Dated this 19" day of August, 2022.

wha Chne 7 ha 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS - 2