United States First Circuit

In a gender discrimination and unlawful retaliation action, district court's grant of defendant's motion to dismiss is affirmed in part where: 1) the district court did not err in dismissing Title VII claims against individual employee defendants as there is no individual employee liability under Title VII; 2) plaintiff failed to show that she was retaliated as she was unable to prove that she was engaged in a protected activity within the meaning of both Title VII and Massachusetts law; 3) plaintiff failed to allege she was discriminated against because of race under 42 U.S.C. section 1981; and 4) plaintiff failed to state a claim on her Due Process claim. However, district court's dismissal dismissal of plaintiff's gender discrimination claim under Title VII for failure to exhaust administrative remedies against defendant is vacated and remanded for further proceedings where plaintiff filed an administrative charge that sufficiently provided defendants with prompt notice of the claims against them.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/23/2009
• Published 02/23/2009

Judges

• DOMINGUEZ, District Judge., Before BOUDIN and DYK, Circuit Judges, and DOMINGUEZ, District Judge.

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Robert J. Forrest, was on brief, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Martha Coakley, Attorney General of Massachusetts, with whom Anne Sterman, Assistant Attorney General, was on brief, for appellees.