Hawkins v. FedEx Ground

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * * SIERRA HAWKINS, Case No. 3:25-CV-00336-MMD-CLB 7 Plaintiff, ORDER v. FEDEX GROUND, et al., Defendants.

11 Pro se Plaintiff Sierra Hawkins filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1 (“Application”)) and a complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

13 (ECF No. 1-2 (“Complaint”)). Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Carla L. Baldwin, recommending that the Application be granted and the Complaint be dismissed. (ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff had until August 15, 2025 to file an objection. To date, no objection has been filed. For that reason, and as further explained below, the Court will adopt the R&R. 18 Because there was no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is satisfied that Judge Baldwin did not clearly err. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 20 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations.”) (emphasis in original). In the R&R, Judge Baldwin reviews the Application under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) and recommends approval. (ECF No. 5 at 2.) Judge Baldwin screens the Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). (Id. at 2-6).

25 The Court agrees that liability for damages under Title VII are only available against employers, not individual employees. (Id. at 4). The Court agrees that Plaintiff must exhaust her administrative remedies by filing a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) before the Court could adjudicate her gender discrimination claim. (Id. at 4-5). See Lyons v. England, 307 F.3d 1092, 1103- 04 (9th Cir. 2002); Scott v. Gino Morena Enters., LLC, 888 F.3d 1101, 1106 (9th Cir. 2018) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1)). Here, Plaintiff attached documents to her Complaint showing she filed a charge with the EEOC alleging discrimination based on “color, race, retaliation.” (ECF No. 1-2 at 12.) On this record, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff’s EEOC charge did not allege gender discrimination.

7 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s gender discrimination claim are dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff to file a new action after she has exhausted her administrative remedy, or to amend her claim to the extent she believes she has exhausted her administrative remedies.

11 Lastly, the Court agrees with Judge Baldwin that the Complaint does not allege, in more than a conclusory manner, that Plaintiff suffers an adverse employment action to support her race discrimination and retaliation claims.1 Accordingly, the Court adopts Judge Baldwin’s recommendations to dismiss these claims without prejudice and with leave to amend. (ECF No. 5 at 5-6.)

16 It is therefore ordered that Judge Baldwin’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 5) is accepted and adopted.

18 It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) be granted.

20 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court detach and file the Complaint. (ECF No. 1-2.)

22 It is further ordered that claims against Defendants Adelzo Diaz, Angela Mladenovic and Eric Verwoest are dismissed with prejudice.

24 It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s claims as to gender discrimination (ECF No. 1-2 at 6) are dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend only to the extent Plaintiff has exhausted her administrative remedies.

1Under Title VII, an adverse employment action is one that “materially affect[s] the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of ... employment.” Chuang v. Univ. of Cal., 1 It is further ordered that Plaintiff's claims as to racial discrimination and retaliation || (/d. at 7-8) are dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend.

3 It is further ordered that Plaintiff has 30 days to file an amended complaint. Failure || to timely file an amended complaint will result in dismissal of this action with prejudice.

6 DATED THIS 27' Day of August 2025.

8 MIRANDAM.DU ———<“‘SCSCS 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE