Mohammed

Mohammed v. Whitley

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 1, 20215:21-cv-03481California3,013 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 ZAINAB MOHAMMED, Case No. 21-cv-03481-NC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO v. DISMISS 13 CHRISTINE E. WORMUTH, Re: ECF 24 14 Defendant. 15 16 Defendant Christine E. Wormuth, Acting Secretary of the Army, moves to dismiss Plaintiff Zainab Mohammed’s first amended complaint (FAC) for Title VII retaliation on the ground of issue preclusion. The Army asserts that the issue in the complaint–whether the Army retaliated against Mohammed for whistleblowing–is the same as the issue decided in a prior Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) case. Mohammed argues that the issues are different because Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) cases and Title VII cases have different evidentiary standards. After evaluating the briefing, the Court grants the Army’s motion to dismiss, finding that issue preclusion applies. I. BACKGROUND The relevant facts from the FAC are as follows. …

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.