Where a former employee of the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, alleged he was effectively forced to resign because of discrimination and retaliation, but he failed to plead facts making these claims plausible, they were dismissed.
Background
James T. Walker was at one time employed by the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA. In his pro se second amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that he was forced out of the EPA as a result of alleged discrimination and based on his prior protected activity when he resigned from the EPA on June 30, 2017. Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss.
Constructive discharge
Plaintiff has not plausibly established that his working conditions were so intolerable as to compel him to resign. Seeking to avoid this conclusion, plaintiff first points to the fact that his job title changed from environmental scientist to physical scientist. This allegation is plainly inadequate to state a constructive discharge claim, however.
Plaintiff also avers that his employer “set him up to fail” by assigning him tasks that he did not have the qualifications or skills to perform. However, courts have repeatedly found that being assigned a more challenging workload does not meet the objective intolerability standard.
Plaintiff’s allegation about an email that he received concerning his vision disorder once again fails to meet the high standard of objective intolerability. Critically, Plaintiff fails to allege the content of that email, and this court...
By Ivan Kesic A drone strike on an electrical generator just outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the United Arab Emirates on May 17, 2026, suddenly brought the Persia...