UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
JASON NDREMIZARA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
) Civil No. 12-1507 (RCL)
TOWERS WATSON )
(TOWERS WATSON DELAWARE, INC., )
TOWERS WATSON PENNSYLVANIA, )
INC.), )
)
Defendant. )
)
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Jason Ndremizara, appearing pro se, alleges that defendant Towers Watson
discriminated against him on the basis of race and age by failing to hire him for an actuarial
position with the company. Towers Watson has moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), or in the
alternative, for a more definite statement. For the reasons given below, the Court will GRANT
the motion to dismiss.
A motion to dismiss is appropriate when the complaint fails “to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Such a failure occurs when the complaint is so
factually deficient that the plaintiff's claim for relief is not plausible on its face. Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). Though facts in a complaint need not be detailed,
Rule 8 “demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v.
Igbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The Court must accept all factual statements as true when
deciding a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Id. at 678. However, conclusory legal allegations
devoid of any factual support do not enjoy the same presumption of truth. Id. at 679. “Factual
allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550
U.S. at 555. “A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed and a pro se complaint,
however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted
by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (citations omitted). Nevertheless, a pro
se plaintiff's complaint “must present a claim on which the Court can grant relief.” Utterback v.
Geithner, 754 F.Supp.2d 52, 54 (D.D.C.2010) (quoting Chandler v. Roche, 215 F.Supp.2d 166,
168 (D.D.C.2002)).
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to establish his
discrimination claim, and relies instead only on conslusory, uncorroborated statements. Plaintiff
alleges no facts to suggest that Towers Watson knew his age or race when rejecting his
application. Further, this complaint is one of nine nearly-identical complaints, with only the
defendant’s name changed, filed by Ndremizara against other companies that have failed to hire
him. Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss 2–3. Taking judicial notice of these cases, this Court notes
especially the order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss in Ndremizara v. Hanover
Insurance Company, No. 4:12-CV-40109 (D. Mass., May 31, 2013), which notes the same
deficiencies in Ndremizara’s complaint.
A separate Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion shall issue this date.
Signed by Royce C. Lamberth, United States District Judge, on August 21, 2013.
2