Name of Assigned Judge Ronald A. Guzman Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge than Assigned Judge
For the reasons set forth in this order, the Court grants defendants' motion to dismiss  and dismisses with prejudice plaintiff's complaint. This case is terminated.
O[ For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.
Lynn Pettis, proceeding pro se, has sued L.A. Fitness and "Cory," one of its managers, for their alleged violations of Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 12(b)(6).
On January 23, 2012, plaintiff began working as a janitor at the L.A. Fitness facility at 11520 South Marshfield in Chicago. (Compl., Cause of Action ¶ 1.) On the morning of February 8, 2012, he sent a text message to his manager, telling her that the night janitor had not properly cleaned the mens' room. (Id. ¶ 3.) The facility's manager, Cory, whom Pettis did not recognize, told Pettis "in a rough and demeaning tone" to "clean the men's washroom up right now." (Id. ¶¶ 3-5, 9.) When Pettis objected to Cory's tone, Cory told Pettis to get to work or he would be fired. (Id. ¶ 6.) Pettis refused, and Cory told Pettis he was fired. (Id. ¶ 7.)
Pettis then went to the back room to get his coat. (Id. ¶ 10.) Cory followed and said to Pettis, "We're in the back now, what now?," which Pettis interpreted as a threat. (Id.) Nonetheless, Pettis told Cory, "You can not [sic] talk to me like that," and walked out to the front of the facility. (Id. ¶¶ 10-11.)
Cory followed Pettis and asked him to sit down to talk about the situation. (Id. ¶ 11.) When Pettis explained why he had been using his phone, Cory replied, "[E]verything is ok, you can go back to work." (Id.) The two men shook hands, and Pettis worked, without incident, the rest of that day and the next. (Id. ¶¶ 13, 16.)
On February 10, 2012, Pettis faxed a complaint to L.A. Fitness, at the end of which he "expressed that [he] would continue working there until a replacement was found." (Id. ¶ 18.)
When Pettis went to work on February 12, 2012, he was told that he had been replaced. (Id. ¶ 19.)
In ruling on this Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the Court accepts as true all well-pleaded factual allegations of the complaint, draws all reasonable inferences in plaintiff's favor and, because he is pro se, liberally construes his pleading. Hecker v. Deere & Co., 556 F.3d 575, 580 (7th Cir. 2009); Greer v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chi., 267 F.3d 723, 727 (7th Cir. 2001). The complaint does not need to contain "detailed factual allegations" to survive defendants' motion, but it must contain ...