Naomi Heneage v. Dte Energy

Good Law
614 F. App'x 893
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 201513-15345California440 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Heneage appeals the district court’s dismissal of her Title VII and FMLA claims against DTE Energy (“DTE”) and her Title VII claims against Nevada Energy Investments, LLC (“NEI”). Heneage failed to oppose DTE’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings with respect to her FMLA claim. Her request for relief on the FMLA claim is therefore waived. See Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 52-53 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam).

Taking the alleged facts as true, and drawing reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff, the question is whether the complaint plausibly states a claim for relief. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 , 129 S.Ct. 1937 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009).

1. Heneage is a woman who alleges she was rejected for a position with NEI because she engaged in protected activity. She alleges that none of the women (three, including Heneage) on the industrial side of the plant were hired, whereas many men were hired. NEI also allegedly gave a variety of changing explanations for its decision not to hire Heneage, at least one of which was untrue. Gender discrimination by NEI is a permissible inference.

Heneage also alleges that she .and three other employees on the industrial side of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.