United States District Court, D. Columbia.
JAMES H. TYLER, Plaintiff,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant
JAMES TYLER, Plaintiff, Pro se, Hyattsville, MD.
For DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant: Nicola N. Grey, LEAD ATTORNEY, DC HOUSING AUTHORITY, Washington, DC.
JOHN D. BATES, United States District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the District of Columbia Housing Authority's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. For the reasons discussed below, the motion will be denied.
Plaintiff sought employment with the District of Columbia Housing Authority (" DCHA" ) " before the year 2008" as a police officer and a special police officer. Compl. at 1. At that time, plaintiff was 67 years of age. See id., Ex. 2 (Letter to plaintiff from Danielle J. Hayot, Washington Field Office, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, dated December 17, 2013) (exhibit numbers designated by the Court). DCHA " never contacted [plaintiff]," and in 2008 he filed a charge of discrimination against the DCHA with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (" EEOC" ). Id. at 1. Not until 2013 did plaintiff hear from the EEOC, at which time, he alleges, he was offered $3,000.00 to settle his claim. Id. Plaintiff declined the offer. Id.
The EEOC summarized the findings of its investigation as follows:
You alleged that the [DCHA] discriminated against you on the basis of your age (67) in violation of the [ADEA] when it failed to hire you for the position of Police Officer on or around September 2007. The [DCHA] was unable to locate any records evidencing your application for Police Officer. However, it did produce an application for Security Officer Position you submitted on September 19, 2007. You were not selected for that position. The evidence indicates that you were not selected because you failed to indicate that you had earned a high school diploma or equivalent degree.
You did not produce any additional evidence that would support a finding of age discrimination. Based on this evidence, it is unlikely that [the DCHA] subjected you to discrimination on the basis of age in violation of EEOC's laws. Therefore, we decline to pursue the matter further.
Id., Ex. 2. The EEOC issued its right-to-sue letter on December 17, 2013. Id., Ex. 1 (Dismissal and Notice of Rights dated December 17, 2013). Contrary to the EEOC's representations as to his education level, plaintiff asserts that he " has a G.E.D. and over 100 college credit hours." Compl. at 2.
Plaintiff alleges that the DCHA refused to hire him because of his age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (" ADEA" ), see 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Compl. at 2. He demands monetary damages and injunctive relief. See id.
A. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Under Rule ...