Marshall v. Caesars Entertainment Corporation ( 2019 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JAMIERA LASHAI MARSHALL * * v. . Civil No. CCB-19-1630 CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION, et al. Fe AK A OR OK MEMORANDUM The defendants Caesars Entertainment Corp. (“Caesars”) and Donna Hogan (“Hogan”) have filed a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff Jamiera Marshall, representing herself, was granted an extension of time to respond but has not done so. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be granted. As the defendants correctly state, individuals may not be held liable under Title VII or the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Lissau v. S. Food Serv., Inc., 159 F.3d 177, 181 (4th Cir. 1998); Baird ex rel. Baird v. Rose, 192 F.3d 462, 472 (4th Cir. 1999). Further, Marshall did not administratively exhaust any Title VII claim. While it appears she did exhaust her claims for discrimination and retaliation under the ADA, her complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 12(6)(b), as she has not sufficiently alleged a disability or that any protected activity was causally linked to her termination. In the absence of any response or proposed amended complaint from Marshall, the motion must be granted. A separate Order follows. —tofv[e LG Dat Catherine C. Blake United States District Judge