Denson-Henry v. The Permanente Medical Group
- Joseph Spero
- 3:25-cv-06856
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In KELLYE DENSON-HENRY v. THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, Judge Chesney granted dismissal, dismissed the complaint with leave to amend, and allowed repleading.
Kellye Denson-Henry's Title VII claims were dismissed, but she was allowed to amend her complaint; The Permanente Medical Group obtained dismissal of the complaint at this stage.
What happened
In KELLYE DENSON-HENRY v. THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, Kellye Denson-Henry, representing herself, sued The Permanente Medical Group under Title VII. The defendant asked the court to dismiss the complaint.
The court found that Title VII does not cover alleged conduct based on an underlying medical condition. It also found that the allegations concerning race or color were conclusory and that the negative performance review on which the claims relied was not enough, by itself, to support discrimination or retaliation claims.
The court granted the motion to dismiss and dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Judge Maxine M. Chesney allowed Denson-Henry to file an amended complaint by October 31, 2025, vacated the scheduled hearing, and continued the case-management conference.
The detailed version
- Denson-Henry v. The Permanente Medical Group · No. 3:25-cv-06856
- Joseph Spero
- Oct. 9, 2025
Background
The Permanente Medical Group moved to dismiss Kellye Denson-Henry's complaint. The opinion states that Denson-Henry proceeded without a lawyer and opposed the motion. The court decided the motion based on the parties' written submissions and vacated the hearing scheduled for October 17, 2025.
Court's analysis
The court addressed the complaint's Title VII claims in three categories:
- To the extent the complaint alleged harassment, discrimination, or retaliation because of an "underlying medical condition," the court held that Title VII did not protect against that conduct. The court cited Title VII's provisions concerning discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, and retaliation for opposing employment practices covered by those provisions. - To the extent the complaint alleged harassment, discrimination, or retaliation because of race or color, the court found that it included no supporting facts and relied on conclusory assertions. The court cited the rule that conclusory statements do not adequately state a claim. - To the extent the complaint alleged discrimination or retaliation on any basis, the court found that the only conduct supporting those claims was a negative performance review. The court held that a negative performance review, without more, was insufficient to support the claims.
Disposition
The court granted The Permanente Medical Group's motion to dismiss and dismissed the complaint because none of the Title VII claims was sufficiently pleaded. The court granted Denson-Henry leave to amend to try to cure the identified deficiencies in the Title VII claims and to assert any non-Title VII claims for which she had grounds. The amended complaint was due October 31, 2025.
The court also continued the case-management conference from November 14, 2025, to January 16, 2026, at 10:30 a.m., and required a joint case-management statement by January 9, 2026.
The opinion's signature identifies Judge Maxine M. Chesney, although the supplied case metadata identifies Joseph Spero as the judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.