Anderson v. Skanska USA Inc ( 2022 )

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 CARLOS ANDERSON, 9 Plaintiff, 10 Case No. 2:22-cv-01007-RAJ v. 11 ORDER SKANSKA USA, INC., et al., 12 Defendant. 13 14 I. INTRODUCTION 15 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Microsoft Corporation’s 16 (“Microsoft”) Motion to Dismiss. Having considered the submissions of the parties, the 17 Court GRANTS the motion. Dkt. # 13. 18 Plaintiff generally alleges that he suffered discrimination and retaliation while 19 employed by contractors working on an Microsoft-owned property. See Dkt. # 1. In 20 addition to being conclusory, the allegations against Microsoft fail to plead sufficient facts 21 to show that Microsoft was Plaintiff’s employer, owed him any duty, or was otherwise in 22 a relationship to him in order to support his claims. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Complaint 23 against Microsoft is subject to dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) because it fails to 24 set forth facts sufficient to establish any plausible claim for relief. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 25 556 U.S. 662 (2009); Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). The Court also 26 considers Plaintiff’s non-opposition “as an admission that the motion has merit.” LCR 27 1 7(b)(2). 2 For the reasons above, the Court DISMISSES the Plaintiff’s claims against 3 Microsoft with prejudice, and DISMISSES Microsoft from this lawsuit. 4 5 DATED this 30th day of November, 2022. 6 A 7 8 The Honorable Richard A. Jones 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27