Gueye

Gueye v. Wells Fargo Bank

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 7, 20243:22-cv-08904California2,672 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MADIABEL GUEYE, Case No. 3:22-cv-08904-JSC

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER RE: DEFEDANTS’ MOTION

9 v. TO DISMISS

10 WELLS FARGO BANK, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 42 Defendants. 11

12 13 Madiabel Gueye, proceeding without an attorney, sues Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells 14 Fargo”) and Chris Potts, a district manager of a Wells Fargo Bank location, alleging Defendants 15 racially discriminated against him in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and intentionally inflicted 16 emotional distress upon him. Now pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss. 17 (Dkt. No. 42.)1 Having carefully considered the briefing, the Court concludes oral argument is not 18 required, see N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), and GRANTS Defendants’ motion WITH LEAVE TO 19 AMEND. Plaintiff has not yet alleged sufficient facts to plausibly state a claim for relief, although 20 he may be able to do so. 21 BACKGROUND 22 I. COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS 23 “Mr. Gueye is an African…

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.