United States District Court, D. Massachusetts
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
NATHANIEL M. GORTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
case involves allegations of Steven Andrew Higgins
(“Higgins” or “plaintiff”),
proceeding pro se, against State Street Corporation
(“State Street” or “defendant”).
Higgins asserts that State Street 1) violated the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
(“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. and 2)
unlawfully discriminated against him based on age in
violation of M.G.L. c. 151B § 4.
moves to dismiss the complaint.
is 63 years old and has more than four decades of experience
working in the financial sector. He holds an MBA in finance
and accounting and multiple professional certifications and
licenses. He applied for jobs with State Street 14 times
prior to January, 2015, and twice more in 2015. Higgins
sought positions as a Senior Audit Manager and Senior Auditor
but did not receive an invitation to interview for either
job. He alleges that State Street knew he was older than 40
years of age based on the information contained in his
November, 2015, plaintiff filed a complaint with the
Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination
(“MCAD”). That complaint was dismissed in
October, 2017 and Higgins then filed this suit in November,
2017. Pending before the Court is defendant's motion to
has filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted. To survive a motion to
dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to “state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). In considering the
merits of a motion to dismiss, the Court may look only to the
facts alleged in the pleadings, documents attached as
exhibits or incorporated by reference in the complaint and
matters of which judicial notice can be taken. Nollet v.
Justices of Trial Court of Mass., 83 F.Supp.2d 204, 208
(D. Mass. 2000), aff'd, 248 F.3d 1127 (1st Cir.
2000). Furthermore, the Court must accept all factual
allegations in the complaint as true and draw all reasonable
inferences in the plaintiff's favor. Langadinos v.
Am. Airlines, Inc., 199 F.3d 68, 69 (1st Cir. 2000). If
the facts in the complaint are sufficient to state a cause of
action, a motion to dismiss the complaint must be denied.
See Nollet, 83 F.Supp.2d at 208.
a court must accept as true all of the factual allegations
contained in a complaint, that doctrine is not applicable to
legal conclusions. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662
(2009). Threadbare recitals of the legal elements which are
supported by mere conclusory statements do not suffice to
state a cause of action. Id. Accordingly, a
complaint does not state a claim for relief where the
well-pled facts fail to warrant an inference of any more than
the mere possibility of misconduct. Id. at 1950.
concedes, as he must, that any claims related to the 14
applications prior to January 17, 2015, are time-barred. See
29 U.S.C. § 626(d)(1)(B); M.G.L. c. 151B, § 5.
Accordingly, only the two 2015 applications are actionable in
Age discrimination standard
both state and federal law, it is an unlawful practice for a
private sector employer to discharge an employee because of
his age or gender. 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq.; M.G.L. c.
151B § ...