Moosman v. Frontier Airlines, Inc. ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 EDRINNA MOOSMAN, Case No. 2:24-cv-00720-GMN-EJY 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v. 7 FRONTIER AIRLINES, a corporation doing business in Nevada; CERTIFIED AVIATION 8 SPECIALIARA, a corporation doing business in Nevada; FLORA MASSEY, an individual 9 and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 10 Defendants. 11 12 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 6) filed in 13 response to the Courts Order entered on June 4, 2024. Plaintiff references the Notice of Right to Sue 14 as Exhibit A, but did not file this with the Court. Plaintiff also did not file her Charge of 15 Discrimination. Without these documents Plaintiff continues to fail to establish the Court has the 16 authority to proceed with her complaint as she continues to assert she filed her complaint within one 17 year of receiving her Right to Sue. Id. at 2. As previously explained to Plaintiff, Title VII of the 18 1964 Civil Rights Act as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act require a plaintiff commence 19 litigation within 90 days after receiving a notice of right to sue letter. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1); 20 Davis v. Consumer Safety Technology/Intoxalock, Case No. CV-22-02118-PHX-MTL, 2023 WL 21 2708761, at *1 (D. Ariz. Mar. 30, 2023); 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a) (ADA: incorporating the procedures 22 established by Title VII). Claims filed after the 90 day window within which to bring suit may be 23 dismissed. Rowland v. Prudential Financial, Inc., 362 Fed.Appx. 596 (9th Cir. 2010). 24 Plaintiff’s allegations also fail to state a claim. Regarding her sexually hostile work 25 environment claim, Plaintiff offers a single sentence that is insufficient to establish severe or 26 pervasive conduct that altered her working environment. See ECF No. 6 ¶ 11. Surrell v. Cal. Water 27 Serv. Co., 518 F.3d 1097, 1108 (9th Cir. 2008). Plaintiff also continues to fail to identify what, if 1 || any, disability she suffers from thus failing to plead her ADA claim. Sanders v. Arneson Prod. 2 || Inc., 91 F.3d 1351, 1353 (9th Cir. 1996). 3 Finally, Plaintiff reasserts her Wrongful Termination Claim. This claim fails as a matter □ 4 || law. See Id. at 5. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint filed 6 || ECF No. 6 is DISMISSED without prejudice. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff will have one and only one more opportunity 8 || plead her claim fixing the deficiencies the Court has identified twice. Plaintiff will have throus 9 || and including July 19, 2024 to file her second amended complaint. Failure to state claims or 10 |} timely comply with the terms of this Order will result in a recommendation to dismiss this case 11 |] its entirety. 12 Dated this 24th day of June, 2024. 13 14 . ELAYNA’J. YOU H 15 Fawn as JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28