What happened
A D.C. federal judge on Friday refused to revisit earlier dismissals in Felix Acon-Chen's pro se employment-discrimination case against the transportation secretary, while trimming additional claims from his latest complaint and leaving at least part of the suit unresolved.
U.S. District Judge Randolph D. Moss denied three reconsideration motions from Acon-Chen and granted in part and denied in part the government's motion to dismiss his second amended complaint. Acon-Chen alleges he faced discriminatory treatment while working for the Federal Aviation Administration.
The dispute centers in part on a supervisor's letter warning Acon-Chen over alleged use of FAA email and government equipment for union-related activity. The opinion says the letter warned that future violations could lead to discipline, but also emphasized that it "is not a disciplinary action" and would not be placed in his official personnel file.
The court had already dismissed many of Acon-Chen's claims with prejudice, but allowed him another chance to plead claims tied to the letter of expectation and to requests for records under the Privacy Act. In the latest ruling, Judge Moss said Acon-Chen's reconsideration motions did not justify revisiting that earlier decision.
Judge Moss also dismissed Acon-Chen's Title VII retaliation theory, finding that he had not plausibly alleged that the letter or any corresponding restriction on his FAA email use carried the kind of materially adverse consequence required for a retaliation claim.
The court dismissed any Privacy Act claim as well, saying Acon-Chen did not allege that he submitted the required Privacy Act request and pursued review within the agency under governing regulations. The judge also rejected constitutional, Electronic Communications Privacy Act and Stored Communications Act theories, finding the pleadings too conclusory or otherwise unsupported.
Acon-Chen also asked for leave to file a longer third amended complaint, but the court denied that request as procedurally improper. Judge Moss said any renewed attempt to amend would need to follow the court's standing order and warned that the court was unlikely to look favorably on another amendment reasserting claims already addressed in multiple opinions.