United States District Court, D. Oregon
MIA R. RINALLO, Plaintiff,
CAPSA SOLUTIONS, LLC, a foreign corporation, Defendant.
N. SOLOMON Attorney for Plaintiff.
M. WESTON EDWARD CHOI Perkins Coie, LLP Attorneys for
OPINION AND ORDER
J. BROWN United States District Judge.
matter comes before the Court on the Motion (#18) to Dismiss
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint filed by Defendant CAPSA
Solutions, LLC. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS
Defendant's Motion and DISMISSES this matter with
following facts are taken from Plaintiff's Amended
Complaint and accepted as true for purposes of
CAPSA Solutions, LLC, hired Plaintiff Mia R. Rinallo as an
Information Security/Regulatory Engineer on July 13, 2015.
her employment Plaintiff's supervisor had the words
“Pussy Riot” displayed on the white board in her
office. At some point Plaintiff complained about the white
board to her supervisor and to Defendant's Human
Resources Department. After Plaintiff complained, her
supervisor retaliated against her by “subjecting her to
unwarranted criticism.” Amended Compl. at ¶ 9.
December 18, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Complaint with the
Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) in which she
alleged, among other things, that she was terminated after
she complained to her supervisor about the white board
display. Plaintiff asserted she believed she was terminated
in retaliation for her “complaint about sexual
harassment.” Decl. of Katrina Mollenkopf, Ex. 1 at 5.
March 3, 2016, BOLI issued Plaintiff a Notice of Right to
File Civil Suit in which BOLI advised Plaintiff that she had
the right to file an action “within 90 days from the
date of this letter.”
April 19, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in this Court on
the basis of diversity jurisdiction in which she alleged,
among other things, that she was wrongfully terminated by
Defendant “for resisting sexual harassment in violation
of common law and ORS 659A.199.” Compl. at ¶¶
August 8, 2016, a Summons was issued to Defendant. Defendant
received the Summons and Complaint on August 11, 2016.
August 31, 2016, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss.
November 28, 2016, the Court issued an Opinion and Order in
which it concluded Plaintiff's Complaint did not allege
any federal claims for relief and her state-law claims were
untimely because she failed to file this action within 90
days of her BOLI Right-to-Sue letter. The Court, therefore,
granted Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and dismissed
Plaintiff's state-law claims with prejudice. The Court,
however, granted Plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint
to state claims arising from the factual allegations in her
Complaint “but without prejudice to Defendant raising
any time-limit defenses thereto.” On December 8, 2016,
Plaintiff filed an Amended ...