Court Opinion

ID: 9889869
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-11 18:00:27.604971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.165115
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-40200        Document: 00516926937             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/11/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit

                                      No. 23-40200
                                                                                       FILED
                                                                                October 11, 2023
                                    Summary Calendar
                                    ____________                                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                          Clerk
   Diana B. Stephens,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                            versus

   Homero Martinez, III,
   Director of Texas Valley Coastal Bend Health Care System;
   Doctor Eric D. Kendall, Chief of Staff;
   Doctor Hilda Thompson, Chief of Pathology and Laboratory Service;
   Maria Ortegon, Supervisory Medical Technologist,

                                              Defendants—Appellees.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Southern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 1:21-CV-84
                     ______________________________

   Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         Diana Stephens sued per Title VII for retaliation that allegedly caused
   her termination as an employee at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
   The defendants moved for dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-40200      Document: 00516926937            Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/11/2023

                                      No. 23-40200

   12(b)(1) for want of jurisdiction. The district court granted the motion on
   the ground that Stephens had not filed her complaint timely.
          The district court was correct, as carefully explained in its Order
   Granting Motion to Dismiss entered on March 7, 2023. The EEOC’s Office
   of Federal Operations gave Stephens the required notice that she had 90 days
   to sue; that notice was mailed to both Stephens and her attorney. None-
   theless, she did not sue until 134 days later. The district court added the
   following explanation: “Construing Plaintiff’s pleadings liberally, Plaintiff
   denies that she received the notice [but] Defendants have established the
   necessary facts to overcome this argument [and] Plaintiff has failed to estab-
   lish the applicability of equitable tolling.”
          On appeal pro se, Stephens asserts that she should have been given
   leave to amend. She has forfeited any such argument, however, because she
   never raised it in the district court.
          The judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED.

                                               2