LASASSO v. FedEX EXPRESS, 5:15-CV-166-BO. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20150728a62
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jul. 26, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 26, 2015
Summary: ORDER TERRENCE W. BOYLE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on defendant FedEx Corporation's motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. FedEx Corporation asserts that all actions complained of in plaintiff's complaint were taken by his employer, and that FedEx Corporation was not and never has been plaintiff's employer. Jackson Aff. 5. Plaintiff appears to have been employed by a separate and distinct corporate entity
Summary: ORDER TERRENCE W. BOYLE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on defendant FedEx Corporation's motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. FedEx Corporation asserts that all actions complained of in plaintiff's complaint were taken by his employer, and that FedEx Corporation was not and never has been plaintiff's employer. Jackson Aff. 5. Plaintiff appears to have been employed by a separate and distinct corporate entity,..
More
ORDER
TERRENCE W. BOYLE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendant FedEx Corporation's motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. FedEx Corporation asserts that all actions complained of in plaintiff's complaint were taken by his employer, and that FedEx Corporation was not and never has been plaintiff's employer. Jackson Aff. ¶ 5. Plaintiff appears to have been employed by a separate and distinct corporate entity, and co-defendant in this action, Federal Express Corporation a/k/a FedEx Express. Eslami Aff. ¶¶ 7,9,10. Plaintiff has failed to respond to the instant motion.
Because it appears that FedEx Corporation is not a proper party to this suit, its motion to dismiss [DE 4] is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
