Saif Khorshed v. Paula Adams

Good Law
670 F. App'x 588
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 7, 201615-55165California467 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Saif Khorshed appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his employment action alleging violations of Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”),, the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), and various other claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Landers v. Quality Commc’ns, Inc., 771 F.3d 638, 640 (9th Cir. 2015). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Khorshed’s ADA and Title VII claims because these statutes do not impose liability on individual defendants. See Walsh v. Nev. Dep’t of Human Res., 471 F.3d 1033, 1037-38 (9th Cir. 2006).

Dismissal of Khorshed’s FLSA claim for failure to pay overtime wages was proper because Khorshed failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim for unpaid overtime. See Landers, 771 F.3d at 644-46 (setting forth requirements to state a plausible FLSA claim for overtime payments); see also Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th…

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.