HARAPETI

v.

CBS TELEVISION STATIONS INC.

3. Plaintiff’s collective action claim under Count III of the Third Amended Complaint (DE 40) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 4. Counts I, II, VI, VII, VIII, IX, and XI of the Third Amended Complaint (DE 40) are

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

5. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to amend the Third Amended Complaint solely² to provide a more definite statement as to which of the Defendants Counts I, II, VI, VII, VIII, IX, and XI are being brought against.

discrimination charge are actionable.”). As the Report states, Plaintiff “alleges that she suffered from discrimination, being passed over for full-time positions[,] and having male counterparts continuously given preferential treatment and higher pay throughout her employment” (DE 73 at 10) (citing DE 40 at ¶¶ 22, 27, 58, 61)), which ended on March 16, 2018. (DE 40 at ¶ 82.) Since it is undisputed that the EEOC’s discrimination charge was filed on January 9, 2019 (DE 40 at ¶ 11), any factual allegation that occurred before March 15, 2018 is not actionable under Title VII or the ADEA. While the aforementioned allegations are sufficient for Plaintiff’s Title VII and ADEA claims to survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, “factual allegations . . . which are said to have occurred after January of 2018 [but before March 15, 2018], such as not getting assigned to cover the Parkland High School shooting in February 2018” (DE 73 at 10), are not actionable here. While the Court did not consider nonactionable factual allegations in deciding to adopt the Report’s recommendation regarding Plaintiff’s Title VII and ADEA claims, the Court construed such allegations as providing context for the narrative of Plaintiff’s employment.

The Report also correctly concluded that the Court should deny Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s claims under the Florida Civil Rights Act (“FCRA”). Any factual allegations that occurred more than 365 days before the filing of an EEOC discrimination charge are not actionable under the FCRA. See Woodham v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., 829 So. 2d 891, 894 (Fla. 2002) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 760.11(1)). Since it is undisputed that the EEOC’s discrimination charge was filed on January 9, 2019 (DE 40 at ¶ 11), any factual allegation that occurred before January 9, 2018 is not actionable under the FCRA. As the Report states, Plaintiff alleges at least three acts that occurred on or after January 9, 2018: (1) Defendants’ employment of a woman younger than Plaintiff, who was paid $33,000 more than Plaintiff; (2) Defendants’ decision to pay Plaintiff less than her similarly-situated male counterparts throughout her employment; and (3) Defendants’ decision not to assign Plaintiff to cover the Parkland High School shooting after Plaintiff complained to management. (DE 73 at 12.) These acts—each of which Plaintiff says occurred during the 365-day limitations period—are sufficient for Plaintiff’s FCRA claims to survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.

KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Moreover, the Court does not give leave to Plaintiff to assert such a claim as part of the direction to provide a more definite statement.