Redwind v. Western Union LLC ( 2020 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON SAGE REDWIND, Case No. 3:18-cv-02094-SB Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER V. WESTERN UNION, LLC, Defendant. MOSMAN, District Judge: Plaintiff Sage Redwind (“Redwind”’) filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice (ECF No. 145). The Court hereby GRANTS Redwind’s motion to dismiss. See R. Civ. P. 41 (providing that “an action may be dismissed at the plaintiffs request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper” if the plaintiff files the request for dismissal after the defendant files its answer). However, the Court dismisses this action with prejudice because Redwind received her “right to sue” letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) in September 2018 (Compl. at 18), and the applicable statute of limitations bars her from refiling her Title VII claims. See Varanado v. ABM Indus., Inc., No. C-07-00804 CRB, 2007 WL PAGE 1 —- OPINION AND ORDER 2915027, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2007) (“Plaintiffs must bring a civil action under Title VI within 90 days of receipt of a notice of right to sue from the EEOC[.]’’); O’Donnell v. Vencor, Inc., 466 F.3d 1104, 1111 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that “where a complaint is timely filed and later dismissed, the timely filing of the complaint does not ‘toll’ or suspend the ninety-day limitations period” for the plaintiffs Title VII claims, and noting that “dismissal of the original suit, even though labeled as without prejudice, nevertheless may sound the death knell for the plaintiff's underlying cause of action if the sheer passage of time precludes the prosecution of a new action”) (citations omitted). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 7S. day of February, 2020. / 2 (Vw (Me pn MICHAEL W. MOSMAN United States District Judge PAGE 2 — OPINION AND ORDER