United States District Court, District of Columbia
JESSALYN L. MARCUS, Plaintiff,
v.
STEVEN MNUCHIN, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Treasury, et al., Defendants.[1]
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
EMMET
G. SULLIVAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Jessalyn
Marcus, proceeding pro se, filed her complaint (ECF
No. 1) on August 27, 2009.[2] The Court granted leave to file her
first amended complaint (ECF No. 32, “Am.
Compl.”) on November 2, 2010. On September 22, 2011,
Judge Urbina issued a Memorandum and Order (ECF Nos. 41-42)
which dismissed plaintiff's claim against the federal
government under the DCHRA for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction, and a race discrimination claim because the
amended complaint failed to state a claim against the federal
government under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 for which relief could
be granted. In addition, Judge Urbina dismissed
plaintiff's tort claims, a standalone “pattern or
practice” claim under Title VII, and her demand for
punitive damages. On February 1, 2012, counsel filed an
answer (ECF No. 49) on behalf of the United States Department
of the Treasury, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and
Timothy Geithner, Lorraine Robinson, Gregory Carper, and
Leonard Olijar in their official capacities.
Based
on the parties' representations at an initial scheduling
conference on April 5, 2012, Judge Urbina referred the case
to Magistrate Judge John Facciola for settlement discussions
(ECF No. 52) and appointed counsel to represent plaintiff for
the limited purpose of mediation (ECF No. 53). The parties
did not settle the case. After Judge Urbina's retirement,
this case randomly was reassigned on April 20, 2012.
On
November 26, 2012, retained counsel entered her appearance
(ECF No. 56) for plaintiff. After discovery closed and
discovery-related motions were resolved, plaintiff filed a
motion for partial summary judgment (ECF No. 82) on February
23, 2014. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment (ECF
No. 93) on March 26, 2014. The motions had been briefed fully
when plaintiff's retained counsel filed a motion to
withdraw (ECF No. 110) on September 17, 2014. The Court
granted the motion by minute order on September 22, 2014.
Based plaintiff's representation that the parties were
discussing settlement at that time, the Court stayed
proceedings and referred the matter to Magistrate Judge
Facciola (ECF Nos. 114-115) on September 24, 2014. The
parties advised the Court (ECF No. 117) that they were unable
to reach an agreement.
Plaintiff's
motion for partial summary judgment does not comply with
Local Civil Rule 7(h)(1), which requires that a statement of
material facts as to which she contends there is no genuine
issue accompany the motion. Although her supporting
memorandum includes a section entitled “Statement of
Undisputed Facts, ” it is not a separate document
setting forth in sequentially numbered paragraphs the
material facts as to which she contends there is no genuine
issue. Without a separate statement of material facts,
defendants have not, and could not be expected to, prepare a
corresponding “separate concise statement of genuine
issues setting forth all material facts as to which it is
contended there exists a genuine issue necessary to be
litigated, which shall include references to the parts of the
record relied on to support the statement.” LCvR
7(h)(1).
Defendants'
motion better conforms to Local Civil Rule 7(h), as it
includes a separate Statement of Material Facts Not In
Dispute. Plaintiff submits a statement of genuine issues,
(ECF No. 99-44), but it is not a concise statement. Certain
of plaintiff's responses are pages long; some include
excess language straying far beyond the facts defendants
assert; others are presented as objections which do not
clearly indicate whether plaintiff deems the fact disputed.
Plaintiff's
pro se first amended complaint remains the operative
pleading. It presents considerable challenges for the parties
and for the Court. Although it identifies “[t]he
defendant [as] the federal government agency that designs,
prints and furnishes the U.S. paper currency for delivery to
the Federal Reserve System, ” (Am. Compl. ¶ 2),
the caption lists the following defendants:
• Timothy Geithner, [former] Secretary of the Treasury
• Leonard Olijar, Chief Financial Officer
• The Department of the Treasury
• Bureau of Engraving & Printing
• Lorraine E. Robinson
• Gregory D. ...