Ledezma
Ledezma v. Optum Services, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MARIA LEDEZMA, Case No. 23-cv-06691-VC
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
v. DISMISS
OPTUM SERVICES, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 14 Defendant.
Optum’s motion to dismiss is granted. Ledezma’s Title VII claim is barred by the statute of limitations. As shown by Exhibit A to Optum’s Request for Judicial Notice (which is granted), Ledezma received her right-to-sue notice from the EEOC on March 1, 2023, but waited more than ninety days—until November 13, 2023—to file this suit. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1); Nelmida v. Shelly Eurocars, Inc., 112 F.3d 380, 383 (9th Cir. 1997). Ledezma’s FEHA claim is timely because she filed suit within one year of receiving her right-to-sue notice from the California Civil Rights Department. See Cal. Gov’t Code § 12965; see also Pearson Dental Supplies, Inc. v. Superior Court, 48 Cal. 4th 665, 682 n.5 (2010). But her complaint fails to explain what her sincerely held religious belief is or how it conflicts with Optum’s requirement that she be vaccinated against Covid-19. Without this information, she has failed to state a prima facie claim…