Heather M. Salazar v. David P. Steiner, Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service, United States Postal Service

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico ruled on defendants’ motion to dismiss claims brought by former U.S. Postal Service employee Heather M. Salazar concerning disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and FMLA rights. The court dismissed the common-law claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, dismissed the Rehabilitation Act and ADA discrimination and accommodation claims, and dismissed the FMLA interference claim; the FMLA retaliation claim remained pending. The court granted plaintiff until April 20, 2026, to seek leave to file a second amended complaint.

Holdings

1. The United States has not waived sovereign immunity for common law failure to accommodate and retaliation claims, so the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over those claims.
2. Plaintiff fails to state a plausible claim for disability discrimination because she does not allege sufficient facts to show she is disabled within the meaning of the ADA or that she is otherwise qualified for her job.
3. Plaintiff fails to state a claim for retaliation under the ADA/Rehabilitation Act because she does not allege facts showing she engaged in protected activity by having a disability or requesting a reasonable accommodation.
4. Plaintiff states a plausible claim for retaliation under the FMLA because she alleges engaging in protected activity (using FMLA leave), suffering a materially adverse action (demotion), and a causal connection.
5. Plaintiff fails to state a claim for failure to accommodate because she does not allege facts showing she is disabled, otherwise qualified, or what specific accommodation she requested.
6. Plaintiff fails to state a claim for FMLA interference because she does not allege that Defendants prevented her from taking the full 12 weeks of leave, denied reinstatement, or initially denied her permission to take leave.
7. The McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework is an evidentiary standard for summary judgment and is not a pleading requirement at the motion to dismiss stage.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over common law claims for failure to accommodate and retaliation against the United States.
2. Whether Plaintiff states a plausible claim for disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act.
3. Whether Plaintiff states a plausible claim for retaliation under the ADA/Rehabilitation Act and FMLA.
4. Whether Plaintiff states a plausible claim for failure to accommodate under the Rehabilitation Act.
5. Whether Plaintiff states a plausible claim for interference with FMLA rights.

Disposition

affirmed_in_part_reversed_in_part