Preview:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

ROGER J. TRAVERSA Plaintiff v. HENRY B. FORD, et al. Defendants

* * * * CIVIL NO. L-10-442 * * * ******* MEMORANDUM

This case arises from an employment dispute. Plaintiff Roger J. Traversa was employed by Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation ("Northrop Grumman"). In 2004, Northrop Grumman terminated Traversa, citing his frequent late arrival time, sleepiness during meetings, and deteriorating work product. After his termination, Traversa filed a complaint with the Maryland Commission on Human Relations ("the Commission"). Traversa claimed that Northrop Grumman discriminated against him because he suffered from sleep apnea. While his administrative complaint was pending, Traversa consented to arbitration with Northrop Grumman, and the Commission postponed its investigation. After Northrop Grumman prevailed at arbitration, the Commission resumed the investigation. Ultimately, the Commission concluded that Traversa was not disabled and, therefore, that he had not been subject to discrimination. In the instant suit, Traversa alleges that five employees of the Commission (collectively, "the Defendants") violated his civil rights and acted negligently by delaying investigation of his complaint and concluding that he was not disabled.

Now pending is the Defendants' motion to dismiss. (Docket No. 11). No hearing is necessary to decide this matter. See Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2008). For the reasons stated
U U

herein, the Court will, by separate Order of even date, GRANT the motion. The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE the case. I. Background The Court is well-acquainted with the facts of this case. Proceeding pro se, Traversa has thrice filed suit in this Court to challenge the arbitrator's decision.1 Because Traversa is barred from further challenging the arbitrator's award, he has turned his sights on a new target, the Maryland Commission on Human Relations. Traversa alleges that the Commission, its Executive Director, its Deputy Director, and three members of its investigatory staff violated his civil rights, and acted negligently and with malice, by delaying investigation of his complaint and concluding that he was not disabled. On March 2, 2010, the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Docket No. 3. Traversa voluntarily dismissed the Commission, conceding that it is immune from suit under

Download Roger J. Traversa v. Henry B. Ford, et al..pdf

Maryland Law