DLD-182 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 12-2170
___________
IN RE: KIT B. LEE,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(Related to 09-cv-05720)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
May 17, 2012
Before: AMBRO, JORDAN and VANASKIE, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: May 25, 2012)
_________
OPINION
_________
PER CURIAM
In November 2009, the petitioner, Kit Lee, filed a complaint in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey against Sunrise Senior Living, Inc., alleging
employment discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Lee also asserted a state-law defamation
claim. The District Court subsequently dismissed the complaint due to Lee’s failure to
1
comply with several discovery orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37. Upon review, this Court
affirmed. Lee v. Sunrise Senior Living, Inc., 455 F. App’x 199 (3d Cir. 2011).
Lee now seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the District Court to rule on the
merits of her complaint. Lee contends that our previous order affirming the District
Court’s dismissal of the complaint created a “judicial stalemate,” and argues that we are
obligated to “fix the stalemate” by ordering the lower court to reopen proceedings. Lee
evidently misunderstands the judicial process; as noted above, the District Court
dismissed the complaint pursuant to Rule 37, and this Court affirmed. There is no
“stalemate.”
Accordingly, we will deny the mandamus petition.
2