CHIEF Judge Ramona V. Manglona of the District Court for the NMI ordered Zaji O. Zajradhara to provide additional information regarding his racial discrimination lawsuit against GIG Partners Inc.
“Plaintiff’s complaint falls short of stating a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, a federal anti-discrimination law that relates to racial discrimination in the making and enforcement of contracts,” the judge said.
“Plaintiff only vaguely states that he was denied employment opportunities on the basis of being ‘Afro-Latino-Seminole Native American,’ but he fails to allege any facts stating that but for his racial identity, he would not have been denied employment by GIG on any of the alleged occasions,” Judge Manglona stated in a 13-page issued order on Jan. 14, 2022.
Additionally, she said, “the complaint itself identifies an independent reason aside from race for the alleged discrimination —retaliation for taking legal action against GIG and complaining about GIG’s practices.”
The judge said these allegations “undercut plaintiff’s own assertion that it was his racial identity as opposed to his conduct that led to the denial of employment. Plaintiff’s allegations therefore do not give rise to a plausible inference that GIG’s alleged racially discriminatory actions caused it to not employ him for various positions.”
Judge Manglona dismissed Zajradhara’s claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, but allowed him to amend it so he could provide “sufficient facts establishing that but for his race, GIG would not have denied him the positions he applied for.”
Zajradhara, representing himself, sued GIG, its owner, general controller and assistant bar manager in 2020. He alleged, among other things, that the company, which operates a discotheque in Garapan, violated his civil rights, causing him mental and emotional pain, suffering, and trauma.
In Jan. 2021, the court dismissed Zajradhara’s initial complaint as frivolous, but dismissed without prejudice his claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and ordered him to refile it and provide additional information regarding his allegation.
However, instead of pursuing the Title VII claim, Zajradhara filed an amended complaint alleging four new causes of action: (1) wrongful constructive denial, discrimination, and retaliation in violation of public policy; (2) violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981; (3) wrongful failure to hire; and (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Judge Manglona dismissed Zajradhara’s wrongful termination claim with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and futility.
She also dismissed his wrongful failure to hire claim with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
But his claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress was dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim.
According to the judge, “If plaintiff seeks to pursue his 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, as well as his previously alleged Title VII claim, he must file a Second Amended Complaint no later than February 14, 2022.”
In doing so, “plaintiff must also allege sufficient facts regarding the other named defendants aside from GIG if he seeks to establish any liability on the other named defendants.”
“Plaintiff may not assert any additional claims in this second amended complaint,” the judge added.
“If plaintiff fails to file a second amended complaint by this deadline, the court will dismiss this action with prejudice and direct the clerk to close the case.”
Zajradhara, formerly known as Steven Carl Farmer, has filed similar lawsuits against other companies on island.
