Garrett v. Governing Board of Oakland Unified School District

Background

The court addressed two motions concerning Gina Garrett’s First Amended Complaint. Tara Gard moved to dismiss the claims against her. Kyla Johnson-Trammell moved to strike allegations concerning Garrett’s administrative disciplinary process. Garrett did not oppose either motion.

The opinion states that the single-sex discrimination claim remaining in the case was based on a hiring decision. The court concluded that neither the original complaint nor the First Amended Complaint adequately alleged that Gard had authority or any input regarding that decision.

Motion to Strike

Johnson-Trammell sought to strike allegations about Garrett’s administrative disciplinary process as irrelevant. The court found the request premature. It explained that Johnson-Trammell’s decision to place Garrett on paid administrative leave pending an investigation was at least arguably relevant to Johnson-Trammell’s alleged discriminatory intent. The court also noted that, when relevance is uncertain under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), courts in the circuit generally avoid striking the allegations at that stage.

Disposition

The court granted Gard’s motion to dismiss. Because Garrett had previously been given an opportunity to correct the pleading defects but had been unable to do so, the court determined that allowing another amendment would be futile. The claim against Gard was therefore dismissed without leave to amend. The court denied Johnson-Trammell’s motion to strike.

The order states that these rulings were granted and denied at a case-management conference on August 18, 2022, and were entered in the written order dated August 22, 2022.