Jones v. Autozone 2371

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION JAMES A. JONES PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:25-CV-151-SA-DAS AUTOZONE 2371, MARVIN SMITH, and JOHN HARRIS DEFENDANTS ORDER On September 16, 2025, James A. Jones, who is proceeding pro se, filed his Complaint [1] against Autozone 2371, Marvin Smith, and John Harris. He contends that the Defendants should be held liable for discrimination and retaliation pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”). Now before the Court is Marvin Smith and John Harris’ Joint Motion to Dismiss [13]. Jones has not responded, but his time to do so has long passed. This lawsuit stems from the termination of Jones’ employment with Autozone. However, the Court need not delve into the underlying facts because Jones’ claims against Smith and Harris can easily be disposed of. It is well settled that the ADEA only permits suits against “employers” which the statute defines as “a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has twenty or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.” 29 U.S.C. § 630(b). Importantly, “the ADEA provides no basis for individual liability for supervisory employees.” Stults v. Conoco, Inc., 76 F.3d 651, 655 (5th Cir. 1996). Thus, it is clear that Jones cannot proceed on his ADEA claims against Smith and Harris. The Joint Motion [13] seeking dismissal on that basis is GRANTED. Jones’ ADEA claims against Smith and Harris are DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Smith and Harris as active Defendants on the docket. SO ORDERED this the 13th day of March, 2026. /s/ Sharion Aycock SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE