Curtis Abdul Al’Shahid v. Frederick E. Hall, et al.

Summary

The document is an Order and Report and Recommendation addressing the screening of a pro se plaintiff’s amended employment-discrimination complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The magistrate judge recommends dismissal for failure to state a claim and lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because the allegations do not support age discrimination or retaliation under the ADEA or another federal employment-discrimination statute. The recommendation also vacates the prior recommendation concerning the original complaint while leaving the in forma pauperis determination in effect.

Holdings

1. The amended complaint failed to state a claim for age discrimination under the ADEA because it alleged only that Plaintiff was over forty and did not allege facts showing discrimination because of age.
2. The amended complaint failed to state an ADEA retaliation claim because Plaintiff did not allege that he complained about age discrimination or engaged in other conduct protected by the ADEA.
3. The amended complaint failed to state a claim for discrimination or retaliation under the ADEA or any other federal employment-discrimination statute.
4. The prior recommendation to dismiss the original complaint was vacated because the amended complaint was filed as of right and superseded the original complaint; the prior grant of in forma pauperis status remained effective.
5. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal of the amended complaint under § 1915(e)(2) for failure to state a claim and lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amended complaint stated a plausible claim for age discrimination under the ADEA.
2. Whether the amended complaint stated a plausible claim for retaliation based on a complaint of age discrimination under the ADEA.
3. Whether the amended complaint stated a claim under any other federal employment-discrimination statute.
4. Whether the prior recommendation concerning the original complaint should be vacated because the amended complaint superseded the original pleading.
5. Whether the amended complaint should be dismissed during § 1915(e)(2) screening for failure to state a claim and lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Disposition

other