ADAMS v. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION et al, No. 1:2012cv01201 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION Signed by Judge Richard J. Leon on 7/16/2012. (ls, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Dale B. Adams, Plaintiff, V. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et a!., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. JUL 2 3 2012 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia 12 1201 ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court are plaintiffs complaint brought pro se and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The application will be granted and the complaint dismissed. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915~e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss a case "at any time [it] determines that ... the action ... fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2)(B)(ii). Plaintiff, a resident of Harrison, Arkansas, sues the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and its Chairperson for the alleged wrongful processing of his grievances against Tysons Foods. "[N]o cause of action against the EEOC exists for challenges to its processing of a claim." Smith v. Casellas, 119 F.3d 33, 34 (D.C. Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 386 (1997). Rather, "Congress intended the private right of action ... under which an aggrieved employee may bring a Title VII action directly against his or her employer [] to serve as the remedy for any improper handling of a discrimination charge by the EEOC." Id. Accordingly, the complaint must be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. tl 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
