Facts

On January 18, 2017, Raymond Douglas proceeding pro se served his original complaint on Francesca Johnson, Human Resources Coordinator of the Sacramento Job Corps Center. On July 27, 2021, Douglas served the second amended complaint on Rodney Carter, Safety and Security Manager of the Sacramento Job Corps Center. Douglas then brought a complaint against Sacramento Job Corps Center in Sacramento County Superior Court. In December 2021, the United States removed the case to United States District Court for the Eastern District on behalf of defendant. On May 30, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations suggesting that defendant's motion to dismiss be granted with leave to amend and that plaintiff's motion to remand be denied.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that between October 2014 and February 2015 fellow enrollees and "residential advisors" at the U.S. Department of Labor's Job Corps program inappropriately touched, manipulated, or battered him in his sleep, including trimming his body hair and taking lewd photos of him. Further, he alleged that defendant was negligent since staff and administrators failed to adequately respond to his complaints or take necessary steps to protect him from further harm, leading to his ouster from the program. Plaintiff also claimed that defendant was liable for false light because an enrollee shared one or multiple lewd photographs of plaintiff with other enrollees, instructors, and staff. As to jurisdiction, plaintiff argued that defendant was not a federal agency but rather a corporate entity and that removal of the case to the district court was untimely because defendant failed to remove the complaint within thirty days.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that it is a United States federal agency and was immune from the claims based on sovereign immunity. Moreover, defendant maintained that the district court had original jurisdiction because the Federal Tort Claims Act provides the only possible waiver of sovereign immunity in a suit alleging negligence by a federal agency. Further, defendant contended that the clock on the thirty-day limitation to respond to the complaint had not begun because plaintiff failed to properly effect service.

Result

Defendant's motion to dismiss was granted, and the case was dismissed.