Lenkiewicz v. Donovan

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lenkiewicz v. Donovan. Read the opinion of the Court — 118 F. Supp. 3d 255
District Court, District of Columbia·Decided July 31, 2015·No. Civil Action No. 2013-0261·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DENISE L. LENKIEWICZ,

Plaintiff,

Civil Action No. 13-0261 (RCL)

FILED

JUL 3 1 2015

Clerk, US. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Cnlumhi:

V.

JULIAN CASTRO, Secretary, US. Department of Housing and Urban Development

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

Defendant.

9MB.

Upon consideration of the plaintiff” 5 Motion [56] for Summary Judgment, the defendant’s Opposition [67], and the plaintiff” 5 Reply [68], as well as the defendant’s Motion [57] for Summary Judgment, the plaintiff’s Opposition [64] and the defendant’s Reply [72], it is hereby

ORDERED that the plaintiff’ s Motion [56] is DENIED and defendant’s Motion [57] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The defendant’s motion is GRANTED with respect to the portions of Lenkiewicz’s claim involving her 2009 relocation request, her 2009 request to telework, her 2009 request for a printer, her 2009 request for a parking space, and her termination. The defendant’s motion is DENIED with respect to Lenkiewicz’s December 22, 2010 request to telework. Genuine issues of material fact remain in dispute with regards to the

portion ofthe plaintiff” 5 claim concerning her December 2010 request to telework.

It is SO ORDERED this 3 lst day ofJuly 2015.

( EWIE . LAMBERTH

United States District Judge

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

Lenkiewicz v. Donovan, (D.D.C. 2015).

Lenkiewicz v. Donovan (Lenkiewicz v. Donovan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.