United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division
W. FLANAGAN United States District Judge.
matter is before the court on plaintiff's motion for
partial summary judgment (DE 27) and defendant's motion
for summary judgment (DE 36). The issues raised have been
fully briefed and are ripe for adjudication. For the
following reasons, the court denies plaintiff's motion
and grants defendant's motion.
OF THE CASE
commenced this action on December 30, 2015, alleging
defendant failed to select her for promotion on the basis of
her race, color, gender, and age and asserting claims of
race, color, and sex discrimination under Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq. (“Title VII”) and the Civil
Rights Act of 1871, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1981
(“§ 1981”); age discrimination under the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C.
§ 621 et seq. (“ADEA”); and claims
under the North Carolina Equal Employment Practices Act, N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 143-422.2
19, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant motion for partial
summary judgment as to her failure to hire/promote claims
under Title VII, § 1981, and the ADEA. In support of the
motion, plaintiff filed a memorandum of law, statement of
material facts, and appendix of exhibits comprising the
following: 1) plaintiff's first affidavit; 2) work and
performance-related items consisting of plaintiff's
performance appraisals, personnel file, performance awards,
emails requesting plaintiff's work-related assistance,
and training transcript; 3) defendant's organizational
chart; 4) items related to the position at issue consisting
of defendant's position announcement, plaintiff's
resume and job application, Joseph Holliday's
(“Holliday”) resume and job application,
defendant's candidate file, Jan Clayton-Miller's
(“Clayton-Miller”) candidate file of resumes, and
Clayton-Miller's ratings of plaintiff and Holliday's
applications; 5) defendant's work-progression memo; 6)
defendants internal investigation file concerning
plaintiff's claims; and 7) excerpts from depositions of
Linda Smith (“Smith”), plaintiff, Clayton-Miller,
May 19, 2017, defendant filed the instant cross-motion for
summary judgment, directed against all of plaintiff's
claims, including memorandum of law, statement of material
facts, and appendix consisting of the following: 1) Carrie
Uhl (“Uhl”) affidavit; and 2) excerpts and
exhibits from the depositions of plaintiff, Clayton-Miller,
OF UNDISPUTED FACTS
undisputed facts may be summarized as follows. Plaintiff is
an African-American female over 40 years of age and is
currently employed by defendant, a wired telecommunications
carrier, and has been employed by defendant since February
29, 1988. Plaintiff was promoted to her current position, now
known as lead construction coordinator, in 2009. Before
Clayton-Miller hired Holliday, Clayton-Miller was
plaintiff's immediate supervisor. Plaintiff was one of 13
construction coordinators reporting to Clayton-Miller.
Plaintiff performed her job satisfactorily and received
performance ratings of “exceeds expectations” and
“successfully meet expectations, ” with no
2014, defendant posted a position announcement for a
construction supervisor for Clayton-Miller's team. The
announcement included among others the following
-Computer proficiency and advanced skills in Access, Word,
Excel, Visio, MS Project, MS PowerPoint and other required
-Knowledge of project management, project budgeting, and
project feasibility and analysis required.
-Strong analytical skills.
-One to three years leadership experience.
(Position Announcement (DE 32-3) ...