Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_15-cv-01385/USCOURTS-azd-2_15-cv-01385-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Shireen Shekaramiz, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Genesis Corporate Solutions, LLC, d/b/a 

Yash Technologies Corporate Solutions, 

LLC; Yash Technologies, Inc.; and Jacinto 

Arauz, an individual, 

Defendants.

No. CV-15-01385-PHX-NVW

ORDER 

 Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 33) and the parties’ 

accompanying briefs. The Amended Complaint (Doc. 32) pleads claims for employment 

discrimination against all Defendants under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 

the Arizona Civil Rights Act. As to the two alleged employers, Genesis Corporate 

Solutions, LLC, and Yash Technologies, Inc., Defendants’ challenge under the “first to 

file” rule is mooted by the dismissal of the employers’ own preemptive action filed in the 

Northern District of Illinois. (Doc. 41-1.) That part of the Motion will be denied. 

 The Amended Complaint does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted 

as against Defendant Arauz because only employers, not supervisors or co-employees, 

can be liable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Arizona Civil Rights 

Act. Craig v. M & O Agencies, Inc., 496 F.3d 1047, 1058 (9th Cir. 2007); De La Torre v. 

Merck Enters., Inc., 540 F. Supp. 2d 1066, 1079 n.10 (D. Ariz. 2008). 

Case 2:15-cv-01385-NVW Document 43 Filed 12/21/15 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 Plaintiff seeks leave to amend her complaint again to try to plead other claims 

against Arauz. She has already amended her complaint once. She will be granted leave 

only once more to try to plead claims against Arauz. Plaintiff is reminded that allegations 

must have enough factual content to be understood and fairly responded to. Any 

amended complaint must also allege the time or times of any new actionable conduct, as 

there may be a fair question of statutes of limitations. Allegations of place of conduct are 

within the knowledge of Plaintiff and should be alleged with enough detail to establish 

Arizona personal jurisdiction for claims against Arauz. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 33) is 

denied as to Defendants Genesis Corporate Solutions, LLC, and Yash Technologies, Inc., 

and granted as to Defendant Arauz with leave to file an amended complaint as to 

Defendant Arauz by January 8, 2016. 

 Dated this 21st day of December, 2015. 

Neil V. Wake

United States District Judge

Case 2:15-cv-01385-NVW Document 43 Filed 12/21/15 Page 2 of 2