Arnold v. DeJoy

Background

On August 5, 2025, Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued a Report and Recommendation on the defendants’ motion to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) and motion for partial summary judgment under Rule 56. The recommendation addressed 98 job postings identified by Plaintiff.

The Report and Recommendation concluded that summary judgment was appropriate on all but three of Plaintiff’s Title VII employment-discrimination claims because Plaintiff applied for only 61 of the 98 positions. It further concluded that, for 58 of those 61 applications, Plaintiff did not complete the required administrative process within the applicable time period. The recommendation also concluded that Plaintiff failed to state a Title VII claim because he did not allege direct evidence of discrimination; that his claims under New York law, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 could not proceed against federal employers; and that his remaining claims relied on statutes without a private right of action.

On August 21, 2025, the court adopted the recommendation, granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, and granted the motion for partial summary judgment. The court allowed Plaintiff 30 days to file an amended complaint addressing the deficiencies identified in the recommendation. The court later reminded Plaintiff that the deadline for amending claims concerning the three job postings for which he had sought administrative resolution was September 22, 2025. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint by the date of this order.

Rulings

Judge Woods ordered the following dispositions:

- Plaintiff’s claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 and New York state law were dismissed with prejudice. - Plaintiff’s claims under the Veterans’ Preference Act, the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act, the Jobs for Veterans Act, the Civil Service Reform Act, and Executive Order 11521 were dismissed with prejudice. - Plaintiff’s unexhausted Title VII claims concerning 58 job postings were dismissed with prejudice. - Plaintiff’s claims identified in the order as Title VI claims concerning the remaining three job postings were dismissed without prejudice.

The order directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment for the defendants and close the case. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Plaintiff permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The opinion’s earlier discussion refers to the remaining three claims as Title VII claims, while the final disposition calls them Title VI claims.