United States District Court, District of Columbia
RANDOLPH D. MOSS United States District Judge
race and age discrimination case is before the Court on
Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 5) and
Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend (Dkt. 10). For the
reasons explained below, Defendant's motion is GRANTED
and Plaintiff's motion is DENIED.
Pat Taylor is the President of Pat Taylor and Associates,
Inc., a “job recruitment and placement agency for legal
professionals.” Dkt. 5-1 at 5-6. Plaintiff Vicki Carol
Bryant, proceeding pro se, is an attorney who was
seeking work. Dkt. 1 at 6 (Compl.).
February 10, 2015, Bryant responded to one of Taylor's
agency's job postings, leading to a telephone interview
with Taylor. Id.; see Id. at 64. Although
Bryant included a resume in her initial application,
id. at 6, that resume was organized by type of work
rather than by year, see Id. at 66-69, and stated
that a “[m]ore [e]xtensive [c]urriculum [v]itae”
was “available upon request, ” id. at
69. During the interview, Taylor asked Bryant for a
“chronological resume listing every legal
job” she had held-a request that Bryant now
characterizes as “unreasonable.” Id. at
6. Bryant nonetheless prepared such a resume and submitted it
to Taylor. Id.; see Id. at 72-78, 87.
Bryant was not selected for that particular job. Id.
at 6. Bryant later submitted her resume to Taylor's
agency in response to other job postings, but “never
received any replies.” Id. at 6.
does not allege that these interactions with Taylor's
agency involved any discriminatory intent. See Dkt.
11 at 3. Rather, she says, the initial telephone interview is
relevant to this case because it gave Taylor an opportunity
to infer from Bryant's voice that Bryant is African
American. See id. at 4, 5. According to Bryant,
Taylor also could have inferred Bryant's age and race by
inspecting Bryant's various resumes, which describe the
law degree she received from Howard University in 1985.
Id. at 3; see Dkt. 1 at 69.
Bryant does challenge in this case is her
nonselection for a position that Taylor's agency posted
on October 20, 2015, which “s[ought] Portuguese-fluent
attorneys for a review/translation project.” Dkt. 1 at
50; see Id. at 6. Bryant again submitted her resume
(although not the chronological one that Taylor earlier had
requested). Id. at 6; see Id. at 61-63.
Bryant's submission prompted the following email
exchange: On October 20, 2015, Bryant wrote to Taylor:
I am fluent in Portuguese and have attached my docreview
Vicki C. Bryant, Esq.
Id. at 50. Eleven minutes later, Taylor replied:
Thank you for your interest in Pat Taylor and Associates,
Inc. We will review your resume and if it meets our
client's requirements, we will invite you in for
Id. at 51 (emphasis added). Six days later, on
October 26, 2015, at 5:09 p.m., Bryant ...