From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bartleson-Burton v. Macy's Corp. Office

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 13, 2022
2:22-cv-02056-CDS-NJK (D. Nev. Dec. 13, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-02056-CDS-NJK

12-13-2022

CHAUNA BARTLESON-BURTON, Plaintiff(s), v. MACY'S CORPORATE OFFICE, Defendant(s)


ORDER

Nancy J. Koppe, United States Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and has requested authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis. Docket No. 1. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's complaint, Docket No. 1-1, which must be screened pursuant to § 1915(e).

An employment plaintiff must administratively exhaust her remedies before filing suit. See, e.g., You v. Longs Drugs Stores Cal., LLC, 937 F.Supp.2d 1237, 1248-49 (D. Haw. 2013). The plaintiff must attach to her complaint the right to sue letter issued in relation to those administrative proceedings. See, e.g., Delaney v. Lynwood Unified School Dist., 2008 WL 11338726, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 7, 2008); Docket No. 1-1 at 5 (“Note: Attach a copy of the Notice of Right to Sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to this complaint ” (emphasis in original)). In this case, Plaintiff references receiving a right to sue letter, but she did not attach it to her complaint. Docket No. 1-1 at 5.

Accordingly, Plaintiff must file on the docket a copy of the right to sue letter that she received no later than January 12, 2023. Failure to comply with this order may result in the recommended dismissal of Plaintiff's case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 1


Summaries of

Bartleson-Burton v. Macy's Corp. Office

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 13, 2022
2:22-cv-02056-CDS-NJK (D. Nev. Dec. 13, 2022)
Case details for

Bartleson-Burton v. Macy's Corp. Office

Case Details

Full title:CHAUNA BARTLESON-BURTON, Plaintiff(s), v. MACY'S CORPORATE OFFICE…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Dec 13, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-02056-CDS-NJK (D. Nev. Dec. 13, 2022)