Khori Francis v. Doug Collins, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona grants the defendants’ motion to dismiss Khori Francis’s Title VII retaliation claim. The court holds that Francis failed to plausibly allege a materially adverse action by the Department of Veterans Affairs or a causal connection between his protected EEO activity and the Department of Justice’s renewed investigation, and dismisses the complaint with prejudice without leave to amend.

Holdings

1. The fourth amended complaint failed to plausibly allege an adverse employment action attributable to the VA because the core conduct identified was the DOJ's renewal of its investigation, and the complaint did not identify any concrete materially adverse act taken by the VA.
2. The fourth amended complaint failed to plausibly allege that the VA took, directed, or substantially influenced the DOJ's decision to renew its investigation, and therefore failed to plead the required but-for causal connection.
3. Further leave to amend was properly denied because Francis had already received leave to amend with specific instructions and failed to cure the identified defects.
4. The court declined to consider Francis's unauthorized affidavit because it asserted a different adverse-action theory arising after the complaint was filed and did not cure the defects in the operative complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the fourth amended complaint plausibly alleged that the VA took a materially adverse action in violation of Title VII's antiretaliation provision.
2. Whether the fourth amended complaint plausibly alleged but-for causation linking Francis's protected EEO activity to the alleged renewal of the DOJ investigation.
3. Whether Francis should receive further leave to amend after failing to cure defects identified in the prior dismissal order.
4. Whether the court should consider an unauthorized affidavit asserting a new adverse-action theory filed after briefing on the motion to dismiss.

Disposition

dismissed