Wanda Letang v. Robert L. Wilkie, Jr.; Department of Veterans Affairs Agency

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-2311
WANDA LETANG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ROBERT L. WILKIE, JR.; DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AGENCY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:22-cv-00154-GMG-RWT)
Submitted: April 18, 2024 Decided: April 19, 2024
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wanda Letang, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Wanda Letang appeals the district court’s order dismissing her complaint alleging
discriminatory termination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.
§§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (Tile VII), as untimely filed and for failure to state a claim. We have
reviewed the record and conclude that the district court correctly found that Letang’s
complaint was untimely and did not relate back, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c), to the previous
race discrimination action Letang filed within the right-to-sue period identified in the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission’s decision upholding her termination. See Bailey v.
N. Ind. Pub. Serv. Co., 910 F.2d 406, 413 (7th Cir. 1990) (“Rule 15(c), by its terms, only
applies to amended pleadings in the same action as the original, timely pleading.”). The
district court also properly found that Letang’s allegations failed to state a plausible claim
that Appellees terminated her employment because of her race. See Holloway v. Maryland,
32 F.4th 293, 299 (4th Cir. 2022) (“To state a claim for unlawful termination, a Title VII
plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to raise a plausible inference that h[er] employer
discharged h[er] because of h[er] race.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --