In Baker v. Medical Answering Services, LLC, 18-cv-00870, 2019 WL 634654 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2019), the court dismissed plaintiff’s employment discrimination complaint, finding that plaintiff did not sufficiently allege a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
From the decision:
Plaintiff has, however, failed to plausibly allege circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. The complaint is devoid of any facts that directly evidence discriminatory intent or any facts from which discriminatory intent could be plausibly inferred. Although Plaintiff claims that he “felt like a target” and that Morgan “came to work to harass” him, he has not alleged facts plausibly supporting a connection between Morgan’s actions and Plaintiff’s race. (Dkt. No. 1-2, at 1). See Arroyo-Horne v. City of New York, No. 16-cv-03857, 2018 WL 4259866, at *15, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151183, at *37 (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 5, 2018) (dismissing a claim where “Plaintiff fails to allege facts to support her claim that either alleged adverse employment action was discriminatory based on her race”). While an inference of discrimination may be drawn from a showing of disparate treatment—evidence that the Plaintiff was treated less favorably than similarly situated employees of different races—there are no such facts alleged here.
Plaintiff, however, gets a second bite at the apple – i.e., an opportunity to amend their complaint. The court also provided plaintiff with a roadmap, stating that in the new complaint, “[p]laintiff must clearly set forth the facts that give rise to his discrimination claim, including the dates, times, and places of the alleged underlying acts, and identifying each individual who committed each alleged wrongful act. “