Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
September 20, 2011, Decided
Civil Case No. 10-1961 (RJL)
[*420] MEMORANDUM OPINION
[Dkt. # 7, 8, 13, 20]
I. Introduction and Background.
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, claims that she was sexually harassed by her former coworker at the Jacksonville Job Corps Center (JJCC), which provides "a no-cost education and career technical training program administered by the U.S. Department of Labor that helps young people ages 16 through 24 improve the quality of their lives through career technical and academic training" in Florida. Compl. ¶ 1, 10-15, ECF No. 1; About Us, Jacksonville Job Corps Center, http://jacksonville.jobcorps.gov/about.aspx [**2] (last visited Sept. 12, 2011). She commenced this action against the ATSI/Jacksonville Job Corps Center (ATSI/JJCC); Clark V. Hayes, who plaintiff alleges was the owner, the CEO, and an employee of ATSI/JJCC; and Marvin Owens, an employee of ATSI/JJCC over whom plaintiff alleges Mr. Hayes exercised supervision. Compl. ¶¶ 5-7. She alleges: (1) discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by ATSI/JJCC; (2) a violation of her Fourteenth Amendment equal protection rights by ATSI/JJCC and Mr. Owens; (3) battery by Mr. Owens; and (4) negligent retention and supervision by ATSI/JJCC. Id. ¶¶ 16-55. Nowhere does plaintiff specifically pray for relief against Mr. Hayes. See generally Compl. 1
Mr. Owens and Mr. Hayes (collectively, not including ATSI/JJCC, "defendants") have moved to dismiss the claims against them, arguing in relevant part that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over them. See Def. Marvin Owens' [**3] Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 7; Def. Marvin Owens' Mem. Supp. Mot. Dismiss at 2-5, ECF No. 7-1 [hereinafter Owens's Mem.]; Def. Clark V. Hayes' Special Appearance Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 8; Hayes's Mem at 3-6. 2 Plaintiff has opposed these motions, but instead of directly addressing the merits, plaintiff requests discovery regarding defendants' contact with this forum. See Pl's Mot. Opp'n Defs. Clark V. Hayes & Marvin M. Owens Mot. Dismiss, ECF No. 17 [hereinafter Opp'n]. Plaintiff has also filed a separate motion for leave to conduct that discovery. See Pl.'s Mot. Conduct Disc. Limited to Issue Personal Jurisdiction, ECF No. 13 [hereinafter Disc. Mot.]. Finally, plaintiff has moved to strike defendants' dispositive motions. See Mot. Strike Defs.' Answers & Defenses, ECF No. 20 [hereinafter Mot. to Strike].
[*421] First, plaintiff's motion to strike is denied because the federal rules only provide for striking pleadings, not dispositive motions. An opposition to a dispositive motion serves as a party's objection to arguments made in that motion but does not necessitate formally striking those arguments. Second, defendants' motions to dismiss will be [**4] granted because defendants do not have, and have not had, contacts with this forum sufficient to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction. Finally, the motion for leave to conduct discovery will be denied because the discovery sought would not show that the Court would have personal jurisdiction over defendants.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
811 F. Supp. 2d 417 *; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106210 **
BARBARA BOND, Plaintiff, v. ATSI/JACKSONVILLE JOB CORPS CENTER, et al., Defendants.
Subsequent History: Dismissed by, in part Bond v. ATSI/Jacksonville Job Corps Ctr., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157285 (D.D.C., Sept. 20, 2011)
Motion denied by, Transferred by Bond v. ATSI/Jacksonville Job Corps Ctr., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134917 (D.D.C., Sept. 19, 2013)
contacts, personal jurisdiction, discovery, Jacksonville, contracting, general jurisdiction, motion to dismiss, motion to strike, defendants', alleges
Civil Procedure, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Strike, General Overview, Pleading & Practice, Pleadings, Motion Practice, Responses, Motions to Dismiss, In Rem & Personal Jurisdiction, In Personam Actions, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Long Arm Jurisdiction, Minimum Contacts, Due Process, Substantial Contacts, Preliminary Considerations, Jurisdiction, Discovery & Disclosure, Discovery, Relevance of Discoverable Information