United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division
RESHUNDRA C. BROWN, Plaintiff,
OOGP, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ANNEMARIE CARNEY AXON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter is before the court on Defendant Express Employment
Professionals'  (“Express”) motion to dismiss
the second amended complaint (doc. 16), and Defendant OOGP,
Inc.'s motion to partially dismiss the second amended
complaint (doc. 17).
second amended complaint, Plaintiff Reshundra Brown asserts
that Express and OOGP engaged in race, color, national
origin, and sex discrimination, retaliated against her, and
provided a hostile work environment, all in violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42
U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The court
GRANTS Express' motion to dismiss and
DISMISSES all claims against Express because
Ms. Brown failed to allege any facts indicating that Express
engaged in discrimination, retaliated against her, or
provided a hostile work environment. The court
GRANTS OOGP's motion to partially
dismiss the second amended complaint and
DISMISSES all claims against OOGP except the
claims that it engaged in sex discrimination, provided a
hostile work environment, and retaliated against her for
complaining about the sex discrimination and a hostile work
stage, the court must accept as true the factual allegations
in the complaint and construe them in the light most
favorable to the plaintiff. Butler v. Sheriff of Palm
Beach Cty., 685 F.3d 1261, 1265 (11th Cir. 2012). Taken
in that light, Ms. Brown, a black female, alleges that
Express and OOGP employed her from August 10, 2015, until
November 24, 2015.  (Doc. 15 at 2, 6). Express was the
“recruiter and hiring partner of temporary
employees” for OOGP. (Id. at 2). Once
temporary employees have completed 500 hours of work, Express
and OOGP “hir[e] the temporary workers . . . as
permanent fulltime employees with OOGP.” (Id.
Ms. Brown was working for Express and OOGP, Jeff Birk was
OOGP's Director of Operations and Brandon Cook was her
supervisor. (Id. at 5). A man named Brian, whose
last name Ms. Brown does not give, was the assistant manager.
(Id. at 5-6). OOGP also employed several other
people, most of whom Ms. Brown identifies only by first name:
Kandy Jenkins, Christian (or Kristen), Shannon, Mia, and
Zach. (Id. at 5-6). Finally, Express' staffing
manager was Steve Wakefield. (Id. at 5).
October and early November, Ms. Brown complained to Mr. Birk
(OOGP's Director of Operations) and to a 1-800
“Ethics line” about “the hostile nature of
the workplace and the open sexual relationships and
inappropriate sexual conversations in her presence between
managers and other coworkers and the favoritism shown to
those who participated in these inappropriate relationships
over Brown who did not.” (Id. at 5, 7-8).
Birk visited the OOGP facility on November 17 and 18, 2017,
but failed to take any action about Ms. Brown's
complaints and told her to make all future complaints to the
“Ethics line.” (Id. at 8). After Mr.
Birk left on November 18, Kandy, Brian, and Mr. Cook
confronted Ms. Brown about her complaints to Mr. Birk.
(Id. at 9). Mr. Cook threatened to “make [Ms.
Brown]'s life a living hell, ” and
Christian/Kristen physically threatened Ms. Brown.
(Id. at 10).
that meeting, Kandy ordered Ms. Brown to stop using her phone
at work even though other employees were allowed to use their
phones. (Id. at 7, 9). In addition, two white
coworkers, Christian/Kristen and Zach, were suspected of
using marijuana but no one took any action against them.
(Id. at 11).
November 23, Mr. Cook told Ms. Brown that she had completed
her 500 hours of work and “he was ready to hire her
fulltime with OOGP.” (Id. at 8). But he also
told her that because she had complained “about
harassment and sexual harassment, ” he was considering
firing her and hiring someone else. (Id. at 8-9).
The next morning, as she was on her way to work, Express'
staffing manager, Mr. Wakefield, called her and let her know
that she had been terminated. (Id. at 8).
February 2016, Ms. Brown filed a charge of discrimination
with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(“EEOC”).  (Doc. 1-1). Her charge identifies her
employer as OOGP and checks the boxes for race, color, sex,
and national origin discrimination, and for retaliation.
(Id. at 1). Her description states that OOGP hired
her “after referral by Express Employment
Professionals, ” and that OOGP terminated her because
of her complaints about sexual conduct and harassment.
(Id. at 1-2).
the EEOC issued her a notice of right to sue, (doc. 1-2), Ms.
Brown filed this lawsuit, (doc. 1). In her second amended
complaint, Ms. Brown asserts the following claims under Title
VII: (1) racial/color/national origin discrimination
(“Count One”); (2) sex discrimination
(“Count Two”); (3) reprisal and retaliation
(“Count Three”); (4) hostile work environment
(“Count Four”). (Doc. 15 at 12- 23).
moves to dismiss all claims against it, (doc. 16), and OOGP
moves to dismiss all claims except the claims of sex
discrimination, providing a hostile work environment and
retaliation for complaining about sex discrimination and the
hostile work environment, (doc. 17). Before discussing the
motions, the court notes that Ms. Brown's second amended
complaint made several passing references to 42 U.S.C. §
1981, but it did not assert a claim under that statute.
(See Doc. 15 at 1, 3, 14). Ms. Brown concedes that
any references to § 1981 were ...