United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Statesville Division
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER
S. CAYER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MATTER is before the Court on Defendant's
“Second Amended Motion to Dismiss” (document #15)
and pro se Plaintiff's “Motion for Leave
to File [Third] Amended Complaint” (document #18).
Motions have been referred to the undersigned Magistrate
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
fully considered the arguments, the record, and the
applicable authority, the undersigned will deny
Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to file a third amended
complaint and respectfully recommend that Defendant's
Motion to Dismiss be granted as discussed below.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
February 1, 2019, Plaintiff filed his formbook Complaint
checking the box for every type of employment discrimination.
The Complaint contained minimal supporting facts and no
allegation of damages. Plaintiff attached his administrative
charge to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The
charge shows that Plaintiff alleged only disability
discrimination in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et
seq… The Complaint named Plaintiff's employer
and two supervisors as Defendants.
ruling on Plaintiff's “Motion to Proceed Informa
Pauperis” (document #2), the Honorable Max O. Cogburn,
Jr. found that the claims against the supervisors were
“frivolous under [28 U.S.C.] § 1915(e)(2).”
“Order” at 3 (document #3). Nevertheless, in each
of his Amended Complaints, Plaintiff has persisted in
asserting an ADA claim against those individual Defendants.
March 27, 2019, Defendant filed its first Motion to Dismiss
April 1, 2019, Plaintiff filed a one-page Amended Complaint
April 12, 2019, Defendant filed an amended Motion to Dismiss
1, 2019, Judge Cogburn entered an Order mooting
Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and allowing Plaintiff
twenty days to file a second amended complaint. Document #13.
Order stated that:
Plaintiff must submit a completed Amended Complaint in
accordance with this order. That is, in his Amended
Complaint, which Plaintiff should file on a form used for
Title VII actions, Plaintiff must name all defendants he
wishes to sue, and he must assert all claims he wishes to
bring in this action. The Court advises Plaintiff, however,
that he will not be given unlimited opportunities to amend
his Complaint. Furthermore, the Court advises Plaintiff that,
when amending his Complaint, he should consider the arguments
made in Defendant's first motion to dismiss, as Defendant
correctly pointed out inadequacies in the original Complaint,
such as the fact that ...