Court Opinion

ID: 9391638
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-02 20:01:16.105445+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:41.840927
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

TERRA MARTIN,

              Plaintiff,

      v.                                              Civil Action No. 1:22-cv-03659 (CJN)

SADIQ ALI,

              Defendant.

                                      DISMISSAL ORDER

       Terra Martin, who has proceeded pro se, filed a complaint against Sadiq Ali for racial

harassment. See Compl., ECF No. 1-1. She sought $100,000 in damages “for the harassment and

abuse [she] had to go through” due to Ali “hating [her] color.” Id. In December 2022, Ali removed

the suit to federal court. See Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1; 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).

       Soon thereafter, Ali moved to dismiss. See Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 5. Ali argues that

even if Martin’s complaint was construed generously as a complaint of employment discrimination

under Title VII, she fails to allege facts showing that she was subjected to employment

discrimination because of her “color” or to establish a plausible legal basis for her claims. Id. For

example, Ali contends, Martin fails to allege that she was a member of a protected class—one of

the necessary elements for an employment discrimination claim. Id. at 3–4. And she fails to allege

that she exhausted her administrative remedies before filing this suit. Id. at 6.

                                                  1
        Martin never responded to the Motion to Dismiss. Because Martin was proceeding pro se,

the Court entered an Order instructing Martin to file a response to the Motion to Dismiss on or

before January 31, 2023. See Fox Order, ECF No. 7. Martin failed to do so, and thus the Court

entered another order, requiring her to show cause by February 28, 2023, why this action should

not be dismissed. Martin failed to respond by that deadline, and thus the Court entered a second

show-cause order requiring a response by April 15, 2023. Martin still has yet to respond, and so

the Court treats the Motion to Dismiss as conceded.

        In addition, as Ali contends, Martin’s complaint (even read generously) fails to allege facts

sufficient to meet all the elements of an employment discrimination claim. See Mot. to Dismiss at

3–4. And her complaint fails to allege that she exhausted her administrative remedies before filing

this suit. Id. at 6.

        For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice

for failure to prosecute under Local Rule 83.23.

        This is a final appealable order.

        The Clerk is directed to terminate the case.

DATE: May 2, 2023
                                                              CARL J. NICHOLS
                                                              United States District Judge

                                                   2