Cotton v. Transdev Services

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Yazan Cotton, No. CV-25-04045-PHX-KML 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Transdev Services, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Plaintiff Yazan Cotton filed a complaint and an application to proceed in forma 16 pauperis. (Doc. 1, 2.) Cotton’s application is granted but the complaint is dismissed with 17 leave to amend. 18 Granting an application to proceed in forma pauperis allows to the court to review 19 the complaint and determine if it states any claim for relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). To 20 state a claim for relief the complaint must contain “sufficient factual matter, accepted as 21 true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 22 678 (2009) (simplified). This is not a “probability requirement,” but a requirement that the 23 factual allegations show “more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted 24 unlawfully.” Id. A claim is facially plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content that 25 allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the 26 misconduct alleged.” Id. Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim is “a 27 context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience 28 and common sense.” Id. at 679. 1 Cotton’s complaint contains very few factual allegations but seems to be attempting 2 to allege claims for “racial & sexual discrimination.” (Doc. 1 at 3.) The sexual 3 discrimination claim is based on Cotton being “the only person who started a new training 4 with [the floor supervisor] and instead of training most of her discussion was personal.” 5 (Doc. 1 at 4.) While not clear, Cotton’s racial discrimination claim appears to be based on 6 the allegation that Cotton was “lied on by Hispanic co-worker Carlos without question.” 7 (Doc. 1 at 4.) Possibly connected to these events, Cotton “was terminated under false 8 claims & HR retaliation.” (Doc. 1 at 5.) There are no additional factual allegations 9 elaborating on these claims. 10 Cotton’s employment-discrimination claims require allegations identifying how he 11 was treated differently because of a protected characteristic such as his race or sex. See 12 Maner v. Dignity Health, 9 F.4th 1114, 1120 (9th Cir. 2021) (“Title VII prohibits 13 discrimination against an individual in whole or in part because of that individual’s 14 protected characteristic.”) (simplified). Employment discrimination laws do not establish 15 “a general civility code, and employment practices are not unlawful simply because they 16 are unwise.” Id. at 1127 (simplified). 17 To state a plausible sexual discrimination claim, Cotton would need to provide 18 allegations identifying his sex, the adverse action Cotton suffered, and why Cotton believes 19 that action was because of his sex. Assuming Cotton is trying to base this claim on the 20 actions by the floor supervisor, he would need to explain what that floor supervisor did that 21 affected his employment and why he believes the actions were because of Cotton’s sex. 22 For his race discrimination claim, Cotton would need to provide allegations identifying his 23 race, the adverse action taken against him, and why Cotton believes that action was because 24 of his race. Alleging a “Hispanic co-worker” lied about Cotton is not sufficient. The 25 complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. 26 / 27 / 28 / 1 IT IS ORDERED the Application (Doc. 2) is GRANTED. 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. No later than November 13, 2025, plaintiff shall file an amended complaint. The Clerk of Court shall enter a judgment of dismissal with prejudice in the 5 || event no amended complaint is filed by that date. 6 Dated this 31st day of October, 2025. 7 Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-